DONT READ THIS A few years ago, two parents went out for dinner. A few hours later, the babysitter was calling to ask if she could cover up the clown statue in the kids' room, the father said,"Take the kids and get out of the house. We'll call the police, we don't have a clown statue." The "clown statue" is really a killer that escaped from jail. If you don't post this letter on to 10 videos tonight, the clown will be in your bed at 3:00 am with a chainsaw in his hand;sorry
The news station is wrong. He did NOT get a patent. He's applied for them, but they have all been denied- because he didn't invent them. Search Google Patents for Dennis Kline- he has yet to get a single patent.
People need to stop calling it "his" invention. He did not invent this. Proof: Search Google patents for his name. His patents have gotten denied because he did not invent HHO. HHO has been around since the 60s.
@stephanierf1 Of course H can bond to H, H2 is is elemental hydrogen gas. The molecule H-H-O doesn't exist (as hydrogen only has one electron it can bond), but "HHO" is just a term for the combined gases(H2 and O2) produced by electrolysis.
Idiots. Water is not "FUEL" It takes more energy to do the electrolysis than burning the result provides! The welder might be of some use, but this cannot solve the energy crisis because it's not producing any energy! It's just transferring the energy from the electrical grid into a burnable fuel form.
Obviously the second, but this is a false dichotomy. Most of the electricity you use come from coal, (I make the assumption you are american here, sorry if that's not so). The inefficiency of the electrolysis process means you are using FIVE TIMES the energy that would be required compared to gasoline.
I want a solar/hydrogen economy too, but this is not the way to do it, it does more harm than good by far.
Yagayugajaaah! I feel CRAZY!!! If this is true, then it IS the future source of energy. But seeing the formula "HHO" makes me feel a little bit queasy; is it really true? Or is he hgiding something. I hope not. And I congradulate him for giving birth to such a tech to this world. Thanks man. ~If this works, then the only problem that we have is to freeze the exess water. LOL!!!
It's a serious mistake to put our limited water supply on the market. Mass water shortages are predicted in the future. The biofuels industry has already been a key contributor in the curent food crisis.
Your right...all except the not the same as water..Google hydrogen hydroxide...Hydroxide is OH with a negative charge, usually comes from a disassociation from a base..now if you add in a proton (a hydrogen atom is one proton...no electrons if you have an H- ion) that kicks up the charge to a even charge, and gives you one oxygen and two hydrogens..H20. For proof, thats why h20 disassociates into HO- and H+ in solution. So next time research before you reply..because hydrogen hydroxide is water.
Your right...all except the not the same as water..Google hydrogen hydroxide...Hydroxide is OH with a negative charge, usually comes from a disassociation from a base..now if you add in a proton (a hydrogen atom is one proton...no electrons if you have an H- ion) that kicks up the charge to a even charge, and gives you one oxygen and two hydrogens..H20. For proof, thats why h20 disassociates into HO- and H+ in solution. So next time research before you reply..because hydrogen hydroxide is water.
ALl of this is true. H20 and HHO IS the same thing. Except you missed one itty bitty detail. TEMPERATURE. The difference is, the HHO gets so hot, it temporarily turns into a "plasma." That's why it can burn through anything in a narrow targeted jet, and still not feel hot to the touch in surrounding materials.
You missed the most basic rules of physics: ALL of matter can take on solids, liquids, gases, and plasmas. The only vital difference is their temperature state.
did you people not see the gas turn right back to water??? its not wasted, it either goes back to water or when it comes out of the exhaust it will evaporate, back into cloud...get the cycle?
Yes you put more energy into than what you get out, However modern day technology put into building a nulear reactor could produce more than enough energy for this. If they would have said that it would be impossible to progress past steam energy, today sounds insane.
This all nonsense... it would be perpetual motion in a car as he describes it. As Anvilcjl says it takes more energy to break up water into Hydrogen and Oxygen than you get when you burn it, so there is no energy left to make the car go. This would require the breaking of some very basic principals of physics and chemistry that are all well understood.
The welder could work, but... not as described though as it would explode if you mix the hydrogen and oxygen and ignite it... big boom.
The problem isn't that gov't or big oil will "keep this down", the problem is the law of conservation of energy.
He mentions that he uses electricity to break apart the water to produce the Hydrogen and Oxygen. Guess what? That electricity will always be more than the amount of energy released when you burn the gas, because of entropy.
At best this could be used to create hydrogen for batteries, but it's not an energy SOURCE. It's converting one form of energy to another, with waste.
Big oil will indeed see that this never sees the market UNLESS we get Obama in the White House. He takes no money from the big oil lobbyists so he is not beholding to them as McSame and Bush were. It is time we start doing things for the right reason!
What a crock of shit. IF this technology is truly feasible on a larger scale, there will be no stopping it. McCain and Obama will have NO say either way. Quit being an idiot and bringing politics into this. After all this was "allowed" during the "evil" Bush Administration.
You know, what I really want is my own nuclear fusion car. Maybe I'll build make one. Just for me though. I don't want the rest of you idiots out on the road runnig about with nukes under your hoods. Now if I can just get myself some plutonimum, build a small engine that contain and withstand deuterium-tritium based internal combustion and figure out how to build a containment unit around the engine to make it safe for the driver, then we're in business! And no, you can't drive it.
Just give up. People won't listen. They're too busy thinking about how maybe something like this could save them money on gas. It's like selling snake oil. It's technology that's real and has a couple decent applications but certainly no aternative for fuel. Brown's gas machines might be good for welding, say. For auto fuel? Forget it. It'd cost more than gas just to prdouce the output and equipment. But yeah go on believing it's a miracle if it makes you feel better.
FOLK. Its time people woke up from this "water powered" dream!
This apparatus can be usefull in terms of welding (I guess cutting), sure, its probably way more safer than acetylene. but it will take electricity to run it!
In terms of runing ANYTHING on solely water! Forget it! Since it always takes more energy producing hydrogen from water than combusing(oxidising it) it will yield a negative net energy!
If you wan't to prove me wrong, try rewriting the laws of physics!
wakeup! There are cars running on water nowadays! Pay attention on this video, where you can see "test car" running on water. On Dicovery channel, see Eco-Tech... a house using water to generate power, cars running on air and water too. The world is changing!
Amazing unique although only logical, that is what genius people do. It is to see easily what no one has consider obvious. One thing is only the amount should be low since 96,500 columb/second produce 1 mol of this gas according to chemistry laws.
Water prices are already high though. And water is already trying to be conserved. But if he said only 4oz of water per 100 miles that is absolutely outstanding. 4oz is about the average mouthful of water. All america needs is competition against gas to make OPEC reduce their prices. OPEC is pretty much a modern day monopoly.
water is already burnt. H2O represents the stable, non energy containing byproduct of an exothermic reaction of hydrogen and water....burning water is like saying power your woodburning stove with ashes....idiotic....
I find it amusing how the technology is available to have the car run SOLELY on water but they still bang on about it being hybrid gasoline/ water. It's the way of the world. Gas will never die cos of the people controlling it.
Hey guys, go to skeptoid dot com and check out episode #87 (the current episode). It's always a great podcast, and this episode directly addresses this video.
It changes back into water, once its combusted. Just like dripping water onto a hot stove element, the water evaporates, and then reforms into clouds etc.
how could it have 'used' water, matter cannot be created or destroyed, therefore, what has replaced the water used in combustion and where did the 'used' water go??
All we are trying to do is break the molecular bonding between the atoms using just enough harmonic distortion to get the job done, then recombined them in a positively charged flame to melt the metal. Water and electricity are much more accessible, simple, and safer to transport then 400Lb bottles of compressed and highly explosive oxygen and acetylene.
Of course, the massive conglomerate in place that currently supplies the welding industry with bottles of Oxygen and Acetylene would not like it if such a water welding system were to become popular.
When i put an electric device that uses 1000watt an hour into a wall socket, it would mean that i would have used 1KWh, right? Now how many waterfuel can you produce with 1KWh? And how many miles
You must not forget about the free positively charged electron now flowing along the flame to the melting metal. How else do you thank a flame that barely burns flesh could melt the metal so fast?
There are some gross mistatements about this. Its like the user saying Gasoline wont work because you can only get out as much as you put in. The hydrogen and oxygen have high potential energy that can be exploited so there is energy IN the converted substance
Even if you did need to put in a bit more energy, that energy could come from solar power, nuclear power and the gas could be stored in the vehicle while compressed and used later.
Amen "KRAYTHE", I'm tired of everyone bashing HHO do to more energy putting in than you get out. Well lets look at gasoline, 100% goes in 6% makes it to the wheels FACT. SO FOR ANYONE COMPLAINING YOU need to re-evaluate what you say, its hypocritical if you ask me. 94% wasted energy and people are complaining about HHO.....
Yeah, but the 6% efficiency isn't because your using gasoline, it's due to losses regardless of what's being burned.
If you burned straight HHO gas you efficency wouldn't go up significently. So you basically use battery power, which can be converted into motion at nearly 90% eff, to HHO gas. Even if the conversion is 100%, your still gonna get only around your 6% back out from motion. Gas or HHO, it doesn't matter to the car.
I agree that some is lost in mechanical transfer but once again MOST OF GAS GOES UP IN HEAT ENERGY WITHIN THE COMBUSTION CHAMBER AND FURTHER WASTED AS IT IS BURNED IN THE CAT, SINCE YOU ARE GETTING SPECIFIC HERE ;)
Not to mention the few cubic inches of explosive mixture in the hoses is minute compared to the 4oo bounds of acetylene and oxygen in highly compressed bottles.
Hope all you guys know that it takes almost three times as much energy to convert a molecule of water into "HHO" as the amount produced by burning it?
Really all this guy is doing is hurting the environment and wasting energy, because the electricity he uses to split the H and O atoms comes from a big ol' power plant.
All this man is doing is using radio frequency modulation matching that of hydrogen and Oxygen to help break the molecular bonding of the molecules and separate the 3 atoms. The now free atoms rise to the top of the water where the hydrogen is mixed with the O2 and burnt. If the amount of energy required to split the water molecule is less than the cost of producing the same amount o gasoline then there is no reason it should not be employed.
Amen "GSpotter63". Its like NASA's new muscle repair system. They use ONLY a certain frequency of infrared RATHER THAN THE WHOLE INFRARED SPECTRUM. By finding the week spot(or exact spot) you waste less energy producing the same results. I don't think its defying laws I think its new laws that need to be added into the equation. 2+2=4 2+2=4-2
That is why a small child can get a large man swinging very high in a playground swing set. Using feeble small pushes timed with the swinging, each little push adds to the previous push, push enough and he goes over the top. If the small pushes were out of sync with the swinger, many of the pushes would be wasted. Such is the difference between this and traditional water electrolysis.
Your example is accurate. But if you could (and you can) mathmatically add up all the energy expended by the child pushing the adult it would be greater then the energy required for a gorilla to achieve the same results in 1 push.
Harmonic frequencies don't reduce the total amount of energy required. Energy = Force x distance. Harmonic freq. lets you reduce the force required, but the distance increase proportionally.
That's not the point. A constant stream of pushes (like a steady wind) will push the swinger forward even when the swinger is swinging backward therefore slowing him down and wasting energy. Pulse the same amount of wind in small bursts, only when he is moving forward, will increase efficiency.
Traditional electrolysis uses a steady stream of electricity (like a steady stream of wind) to break the molecular bond. This method of modulation is much more affective. So using standard mathematical equations of electrolysis will not work here.
PT1. Your example is flawed by assuming the rider of the swing needs to make the return trip. In your example, the goal is for the swing to reach a higher energy state, say a peak rotation displacement of 40° from vertical. Optimally, a single push sending the rider to that point would be best, but like you say, electrolyses is a strong wind and tends to overshoot a bit, thus heating the solution.
PT2 Once the rider reaches 40°, he "stops" and holds that position. He now has energy available for use (i.e. he can be burned). Harmonics might remove the overshoot because your applying smaller pushes, but my point still stands, the energy to get the rider to 40° is the same, and is more then the energy that can be returned by burning him.
But the rider does not stay at " 40° from vertical from vertical" after reaching that point he swings back regaining momentum to the 40° in the rear and stops, and moves forward again. That is the time he receives the next push.
Let's not forget that we are not talking about a swing here. We are talking about atoms, Atoms consist of electrons that go around and around in circles not back and forth. There is no" 40° from vertical from vertical" in an atom.
The 40° angle represents separation of the h2 and the O atoms, AKA a higher energy state. Once the atoms separate there is no more swinging action. That was your goal with the small pushes right? To separate the atoms so they contained chemical energy again?
They wait there until they are reacted again, at which point they fall to the ground and the whole thing starts over.
I bet you never hear about this again. No, not because he's been murdered, but because it's a bunch of baloney. Amazing how FOX fall for all these scams.
The amazing thing about this is that the Fox reporter knows so little about science that he doesn't even realise how much of a dick he's being. HHO gas?!! HAHAHAH! What an idiot. Hydrogen and Oxygen fuel is nothing new. Nor is electrolysis. This is american stupidity at its prime!
Ahaha this is priceless, Amazing, Hurray, Amen, etc... but one detail, bottled water costs more per gallon than gasoline, So even if this could be the future, It will cost more than current fuel, plus transitioning all the electro-mechanical systems and support infrastructure would be cost prohibitive.
bottled water is expesive because of the bottle not the water, the water is very cheap. problem is you need electrolisis wich involves another energy source. i don-t know if this problem has been solved or not.
oh yeah and that whole bottles water comparison to gasoline is based on the price of single or two serving bottles not by the gallon. I remember seeing those signs and laughing my ass off. Try checking to see how much you pay for a gallon of water from the tap, or rain water, or even go expensive and compare to a GALLON of filtered/bottled water. It's still much cheaper than gasoline.
If they'll make it work on dirty water great, I have a feeling the system will be so particular deposits from minerals in non treated water would damage the engines or clog ion channels
hehehe....cool...so you get energy from water ...by electrolysis huh...uhm so where do u get electricity?? so its energy from water by electricity from power plants powered by fuel..so were back to fuel...lolz...
DarkRezo suck a dick you british dumbass. you're comment was the stupidest thing i've read on youtube. you're an idiot, i'll shove a crumpet up your ass.
Imagine a generator in your basement to power the machine that produced the fuel to power your generator. A big generator that powers everything on your property and it's exhaust condensing into a storage tank of water stockpiled to start this beatiful renewable process all over again. Imagine if you could drink the stuff on top of that. All for a one time cost. Yeah, this guy is so dead.
Well there is an inventor who has built a rocket pack that uses Hydrogen Peroxide as a fuel source. By using a catalyst,it turns into steam and oxygen.
Potrimpo...Hydrogen Peroxide in the higher concentrations is a known energetic propellant (and a dangerous one at that). It's been used in rocketry for ages! However, water won't serve as an energy source unless we can somehow tap into those fusion powers (or something equally amazing)!
This reminds me of That 70s show..."It runs on water man!!!" (they are all completely baked)
HHO gas? Sounds like a semi-fraud to me, especially as that's water H2O - HHO - I doubt there can be a bond between H and H and O at the same time, anyway that would require a cyclic molecule or actualy HOHO (also impossible) or H2O2 (fairly dangerous) Unless the guy come up with a specific formula, I don't believe him at all.
Nah, not exactly, if that was the case, you couldn't weld with it, and you obviously can. So the gas must be unbonded H and O, Thus H2 and O2 molecules. Except the inventer claim otherwise, he claim the bond is "different", whatever that means. That is why I wrote about the actual bond above, I do know what water is, but I don't know how to subscript here.
umm...use the water up? are you serious? like...use the countless trillions of gallons of oceans up, even though the exhaust would be water vapor, which would become water again? think about what you just asked.
The thing that really bothers me about this is that I KNOW other people have come up with the same process before. This HHO gas they speak of is sometimes referred to as Brown's Gas, and I have a manual from abotu 3 years ago instructing how to build the same type of electrolytic device that this guy supposedly just patented.
This was.. kinda a couple of years ago o_o So the manual you have might be made after that machine he invented o_O His car is a '94, if you didn't hear in the video
I was judging that the date the video was added was closer to the date of this news report, but I am obviously not sure. Good point though! I guess I could look up the patent itself.
I have a BS in Chemical Engineering, a MS in Materials Engineering and am a TA in chemistry. I have talked to my PhD advisors about this, none of us can prove the thermodynamics of how this works. What this video shows is impossible at face value.
You can't alter the laws of thermodynamics. You can't get more energy out than you put in.
Sure you can produce hydrogen from water by hydraulosis, but that takes energy. And due to the inevitable inefficiencies, you can't get more energy back by running the chemical process in reverse.
Just another example of our public school educational system.
wait wait so this guy and the other guy John K. discovered this in the same time? how come all so sudden? this thing is confusing me but il prob be dead until this thing launches or something
yea even though its getting rid of fossil fuels, its waisting more water than ever, and if global warmin is reall, this would not really help us any unlesss we get permission to use recycled water for drinking water.
huh? how come the world isnt making a big deal of this yet?? ITS GONA REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING YAAAAAAAAAAAAAY!!! but very suspicious....BUT YAAAAY!!!! this is gona bother me for a long time
Considering, however, that the Earth is covered in 3/4 water, and that the gas turns back into water after it's exaustion, PLUS the fact that a car requires only 4 oz for 100 miles of travel, this could possibly be the best and safest way to cut down on oil reliance and gas pollution. It'd be killing two birds with one stone.
to answer tony the only reason it isnt being used everywhere, is because if this kind of technology was released to public, gas companies would go bankrupt, and the governemnt would loose soooo much money, and they dont want to do that now do they ???
because it was patented like the narrator said therefor it is at the discretion of the man who made it to wether it is used for an alternative source of power...
that was almost six years ago, whats going on with this invention. What is the name of his company?
cris2117 2 weeks ago
canada has 70% of the water in the worlds,and it's not so far away..,,mr. bush
mrmba2003 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DONT READ THIS A few years ago, two parents went out for dinner. A few hours later, the babysitter was calling to ask if she could cover up the clown statue in the kids' room, the father said,"Take the kids and get out of the house. We'll call the police, we don't have a clown statue." The "clown statue" is really a killer that escaped from jail. If you don't post this letter on to 10 videos tonight, the clown will be in your bed at 3:00 am with a chainsaw in his hand;sorry
coolyzube 1 year ago
Yull Brown (Ilia Valkov) is great :-)
john76g 2 years ago
The news station is wrong. He did NOT get a patent. He's applied for them, but they have all been denied- because he didn't invent them. Search Google Patents for Dennis Kline- he has yet to get a single patent.
imanerd36 2 years ago
People need to stop calling it "his" invention. He did not invent this. Proof: Search Google patents for his name. His patents have gotten denied because he did not invent HHO. HHO has been around since the 60s.
imanerd36 2 years ago
@imanerd36 umm HHO doesn't exist...H cannot bond to H
stephanierf1 1 year ago
@stephanierf1 Of course H can bond to H, H2 is is elemental hydrogen gas. The molecule H-H-O doesn't exist (as hydrogen only has one electron it can bond), but "HHO" is just a term for the combined gases(H2 and O2) produced by electrolysis.
imanerd36 1 year ago
Idiots. Water is not "FUEL" It takes more energy to do the electrolysis than burning the result provides! The welder might be of some use, but this cannot solve the energy crisis because it's not producing any energy! It's just transferring the energy from the electrical grid into a burnable fuel form.
cyxgun 2 years ago 2
what is better? Find, extract, transport, refine, oil ... or use renewable energy (hydro-electric / solar) to produce hydrogen?
muelsa373 2 years ago
Obviously the second, but this is a false dichotomy. Most of the electricity you use come from coal, (I make the assumption you are american here, sorry if that's not so). The inefficiency of the electrolysis process means you are using FIVE TIMES the energy that would be required compared to gasoline.
I want a solar/hydrogen economy too, but this is not the way to do it, it does more harm than good by far.
cyxgun 2 years ago 2
@muelsa373 or just use electric
dzgfdg 1 year ago
Youre So stupid Bitch when you dont know just dont write a comment :@
Valko19996 2 years ago
You can say that ten thousand times and it won't make a difference.
I've commented that ALL OVER these videos, and on the HHO car power videos....and all I get is outrage focused on me :D
GetMeThere1 2 years ago
THEF !!! this is Bulgarian invention made by Yull Brown. The device you see in the beging is made in China and cost $3600.
There is nothing invented by This Man. He just copied the work of another man.
THEF .
keebordcowboy 2 years ago 2
No, this is an improvement. Not a direct copy. This device is actually more efficient and smaller than Yull Born's device.
MustangMarck 2 years ago
Spelling fail
aslonds 2 years ago
Old...
Still I hope that the new nuclear fussion teh. will go far than we imagine...
I always wanted to se how deiterium is used x)
JurasTW 2 years ago
This is awesome, all these technology advances we have made.
JasonEB03 3 years ago
Yagayugajaaah! I feel CRAZY!!! If this is true, then it IS the future source of energy. But seeing the formula "HHO" makes me feel a little bit queasy; is it really true? Or is he hgiding something. I hope not. And I congradulate him for giving birth to such a tech to this world. Thanks man. ~If this works, then the only problem that we have is to freeze the exess water. LOL!!!
LuiKang043 3 years ago
tyrusbigorok, your so wrong. helium cant turn into a solid. quantum physics shows why.
tonyrosam 3 years ago
It's a serious mistake to put our limited water supply on the market. Mass water shortages are predicted in the future. The biofuels industry has already been a key contributor in the curent food crisis.
lGnossos 3 years ago
what would be best is to utilize the abundant electricity in the ionosphere, what nikola tesla would have done...
jellofast 3 years ago
well why dont we do what aliens do in films, go to a differant planet and mine
bogieman987 3 years ago
This is fake. H20 to HHO Gas? Thats water to water. Come on people Think
chadboatner 3 years ago
HHO is hydrogen hydroxide; not the same thing as water. good game bitch.
jakesta717 3 years ago
Your right...all except the not the same as water..Google hydrogen hydroxide...Hydroxide is OH with a negative charge, usually comes from a disassociation from a base..now if you add in a proton (a hydrogen atom is one proton...no electrons if you have an H- ion) that kicks up the charge to a even charge, and gives you one oxygen and two hydrogens..H20. For proof, thats why h20 disassociates into HO- and H+ in solution. So next time research before you reply..because hydrogen hydroxide is water.
chadboatner 3 years ago
Your right...all except the not the same as water..Google hydrogen hydroxide...Hydroxide is OH with a negative charge, usually comes from a disassociation from a base..now if you add in a proton (a hydrogen atom is one proton...no electrons if you have an H- ion) that kicks up the charge to a even charge, and gives you one oxygen and two hydrogens..H20. For proof, thats why h20 disassociates into HO- and H+ in solution. So next time research before you reply..because hydrogen hydroxide is water.
chadboatner 3 years ago
Come on jakesta717 im waiting for a reply...you started this dont just run away
chadboatner 3 years ago
what about hydrogen jets they use water dont they?
bogieman987 3 years ago
ALl of this is true. H20 and HHO IS the same thing. Except you missed one itty bitty detail. TEMPERATURE. The difference is, the HHO gets so hot, it temporarily turns into a "plasma." That's why it can burn through anything in a narrow targeted jet, and still not feel hot to the touch in surrounding materials.
You missed the most basic rules of physics: ALL of matter can take on solids, liquids, gases, and plasmas. The only vital difference is their temperature state.
tyrusbigorok 3 years ago
did you people not see the gas turn right back to water??? its not wasted, it either goes back to water or when it comes out of the exhaust it will evaporate, back into cloud...get the cycle?
mrderek08 3 years ago
you could still use solar power for the electricity.
BlowinGaskets 3 years ago
If not water then what? It's way more abundant that oil. I think that in conjunction with wind and solar power it's a great start.
zonk1024 3 years ago
thats a great idea=]
instead of using fossil fuels, use up all the water instead, then we can die of no water!
genious!
O2X2I 3 years ago
Oceans? 75% of the earth's surface?
zonk1024 3 years ago
oh well done =] u read your science text books bless
thats not as much as you think lol, it wont last that long
O2X2I 3 years ago
yes but pure water is produced
BlowinGaskets 3 years ago
he said he can run a 100 mile trip on four ounces of water...
thats amazing!
TomatoAndBanana 3 years ago
Yes you put more energy into than what you get out, However modern day technology put into building a nulear reactor could produce more than enough energy for this. If they would have said that it would be impossible to progress past steam energy, today sounds insane.
dodge700 3 years ago
law of conservation of energy > this guy
the fundamental law hasnt been proven wrong yet
Krisspychiken 3 years ago
This all nonsense... it would be perpetual motion in a car as he describes it. As Anvilcjl says it takes more energy to break up water into Hydrogen and Oxygen than you get when you burn it, so there is no energy left to make the car go. This would require the breaking of some very basic principals of physics and chemistry that are all well understood.
The welder could work, but... not as described though as it would explode if you mix the hydrogen and oxygen and ignite it... big boom.
MacGreggToo 3 years ago
The problem isn't that gov't or big oil will "keep this down", the problem is the law of conservation of energy.
He mentions that he uses electricity to break apart the water to produce the Hydrogen and Oxygen. Guess what? That electricity will always be more than the amount of energy released when you burn the gas, because of entropy.
At best this could be used to create hydrogen for batteries, but it's not an energy SOURCE. It's converting one form of energy to another, with waste.
Anvilcjl 3 years ago 2
250260464922 ebay item for electronics for fuel cell. Only $199
googleproads 3 years ago
whats the fucking hold up? Every new car sold should be required to use this! This would save the world!
mkultra2300 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thats actually good =]
timdart123 3 years ago
Big oil will indeed see that this never sees the market UNLESS we get Obama in the White House. He takes no money from the big oil lobbyists so he is not beholding to them as McSame and Bush were. It is time we start doing things for the right reason!
Vincel3332000 3 years ago
What a crock of shit. IF this technology is truly feasible on a larger scale, there will be no stopping it. McCain and Obama will have NO say either way. Quit being an idiot and bringing politics into this. After all this was "allowed" during the "evil" Bush Administration.
ToddAldrich 3 years ago
nice
MIDGETTROMA 3 years ago
lol he lives in Clearwater
matthewcolenbrander 3 years ago 6
finally sooner or later we wont need to spend thousands on oil for gas every year
Patriotfrosh15 3 years ago
It'll NEVER see the light of day, let alone wise use. Big Oil will see to that.
Pbirv 3 years ago
why don't we use this technology already!
LilReaper1010 3 years ago
promote it..
many people dont know they can do something about this...
just tell people about it=) it is a beginning..
Wulfgar12 3 years ago
You know, what I really want is my own nuclear fusion car. Maybe I'll build make one. Just for me though. I don't want the rest of you idiots out on the road runnig about with nukes under your hoods. Now if I can just get myself some plutonimum, build a small engine that contain and withstand deuterium-tritium based internal combustion and figure out how to build a containment unit around the engine to make it safe for the driver, then we're in business! And no, you can't drive it.
upinarms79 3 years ago
what the hell you wanna make a million miles per hour car
JC23333 3 years ago
Just give up. People won't listen. They're too busy thinking about how maybe something like this could save them money on gas. It's like selling snake oil. It's technology that's real and has a couple decent applications but certainly no aternative for fuel. Brown's gas machines might be good for welding, say. For auto fuel? Forget it. It'd cost more than gas just to prdouce the output and equipment. But yeah go on believing it's a miracle if it makes you feel better.
upinarms79 3 years ago
the goverment has been useing this for ever
ninjaforsale 3 years ago 3
FOLK. Its time people woke up from this "water powered" dream!
This apparatus can be usefull in terms of welding (I guess cutting), sure, its probably way more safer than acetylene. but it will take electricity to run it!
In terms of runing ANYTHING on solely water! Forget it! Since it always takes more energy producing hydrogen from water than combusing(oxidising it) it will yield a negative net energy!
If you wan't to prove me wrong, try rewriting the laws of physics!
Johanoeberg 3 years ago
true... true...
mrpumpkin 3 years ago
wakeup! There are cars running on water nowadays! Pay attention on this video, where you can see "test car" running on water. On Dicovery channel, see Eco-Tech... a house using water to generate power, cars running on air and water too. The world is changing!
sysxtreme 3 years ago 3
Wakeup yourself up while your at it! Instead of writing about it, why not shut me up by showing a car/engine that runs on water...!?!
I just don't believe why there are so many dumbnuts thinking water is the fuel!
Well, I guess you are right, some of the electricity we use right now is FROM WATER. The Hoover dam is a "miracle", and thats not a spoof like this.
Prove me wrong!!!
Johanoeberg 3 years ago
You are looking at a video that proves you wrong right now:P..
Wulfgar12 3 years ago 2
Dear Sirs,
Amazing unique although only logical, that is what genius people do. It is to see easily what no one has consider obvious. One thing is only the amount should be low since 96,500 columb/second produce 1 mol of this gas according to chemistry laws.
wyldmath1 3 years ago
Water prices are already high though. And water is already trying to be conserved. But if he said only 4oz of water per 100 miles that is absolutely outstanding. 4oz is about the average mouthful of water. All america needs is competition against gas to make OPEC reduce their prices. OPEC is pretty much a modern day monopoly.
DemoFly 3 years ago
water is already burnt. H2O represents the stable, non energy containing byproduct of an exothermic reaction of hydrogen and water....burning water is like saying power your woodburning stove with ashes....idiotic....
lesliemisaacs 3 years ago
you are an agent of the corrupt government spreading disinformation FOAD beotch!!
HARMANHOUSE1 3 years ago
You're right, I am not disputing that...but you do know charcoal briquettes are just burned wood right? Just something to ponder.
JoshR1 3 years ago
Charcoal is wood burned in conditions with too little Oxygen (I belive).
Every statement like "car runs on water", "water fuel car" should be readily thought about and thrown in the garbage can!
it IS physically and chemically impossible to get more energy from hydrogen compared to what you put into it!
When someone comes up with a way to electrolyse water that gives more energy then you put in, I will be the first to buy the blueprints!
Johanoeberg 3 years ago
Wakeup!
sysxtreme 3 years ago 10
do u think this guy likes 2 eat a long sub with ham
dennisthegreek89 3 years ago
I find it amusing how the technology is available to have the car run SOLELY on water but they still bang on about it being hybrid gasoline/ water. It's the way of the world. Gas will never die cos of the people controlling it.
chrispyt77 3 years ago 2
ahahaha i thought the very same thing
that shits whacky
sheeitsonn 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey guys, go to skeptoid dot com and check out episode #87 (the current episode). It's always a great podcast, and this episode directly addresses this video.
Datan0de 4 years ago
govt wanted in on this rofl/ they prolly like DAMN son why the FUCK are we in iraq?
GodlessMartyr666 4 years ago 3
Producing, storing and distributing hydrogen is not energy efficient.
TECHKLEC 4 years ago
You are amazing. Has anyone tried to censor you or threaten you yet?
LOVE IT!!!!
MookeyMonkey 4 years ago 2
i love this idea, if we can just get a conversion kit on the market the world will be saved.
i wanted to ask.. if there are any experts here, is the end-product water drinkable? is it changed in any way?
starfleet030 4 years ago
it changes back to water once it's combusted
bcnc356 4 years ago
yeah i know, my question was "is it drinkable?"
i want to know if it changes in any way after combustion. is it pure H2O or H2O2 or what?
Starfleet0 4 years ago
It changes back into water, once its combusted. Just like dripping water onto a hot stove element, the water evaporates, and then reforms into clouds etc.
- Grade 3
dawsonkidtko 4 years ago
There is nothing called H2O2...
You mean 2H2O wich is impossiple;)
Leviathandk 4 years ago
so.. could it be possible to get the exhaust water and cycle it right back into the engine and have an unlimited supply?
starfleet030 4 years ago
no, that breaks pretty much all the laws of thermo-dynamics. the water created couldn't be as much as was used, it's literaly impossible
vulcan6412 3 years ago
how could it have 'used' water, matter cannot be created or destroyed, therefore, what has replaced the water used in combustion and where did the 'used' water go??
Starfleet0 3 years ago
hey how much does it cost to turn my car into an hho running vehicle?
sircesare 4 years ago
its prolly cost less... i heard it'll be sold soon in the future.
esykillll 4 years ago
Did you mean 'probably' (prolly)?
Notimetowait 3 years ago
All we are trying to do is break the molecular bonding between the atoms using just enough harmonic distortion to get the job done, then recombined them in a positively charged flame to melt the metal. Water and electricity are much more accessible, simple, and safer to transport then 400Lb bottles of compressed and highly explosive oxygen and acetylene.
GSpotter63 4 years ago
Of course, the massive conglomerate in place that currently supplies the welding industry with bottles of Oxygen and Acetylene would not like it if such a water welding system were to become popular.
GSpotter63 4 years ago
When i put an electric device that uses 1000watt an hour into a wall socket, it would mean that i would have used 1KWh, right? Now how many waterfuel can you produce with 1KWh? And how many miles
would a car run on that?
3DPeter 4 years ago
For all those spliting water;
-1kWh=860kcal
-H2 combustion energy = 33811kcal/kg
-you need 8.9368 kg of water to get 1kg of H.The rest (7.9368 kg) is O.
So,in 1kg of H2O we have 4,4 kwH of H.
Let the electrolizer work for 1 hour, weigh the water "evaporated", calculate electric consumption and then tell us...
ghandrei 4 years ago
You must not forget about the free positively charged electron now flowing along the flame to the melting metal. How else do you thank a flame that barely burns flesh could melt the metal so fast?
GSpotter63 4 years ago
There are some gross mistatements about this. Its like the user saying Gasoline wont work because you can only get out as much as you put in. The hydrogen and oxygen have high potential energy that can be exploited so there is energy IN the converted substance
Even if you did need to put in a bit more energy, that energy could come from solar power, nuclear power and the gas could be stored in the vehicle while compressed and used later.
kraythe 4 years ago
Amen "KRAYTHE", I'm tired of everyone bashing HHO do to more energy putting in than you get out. Well lets look at gasoline, 100% goes in 6% makes it to the wheels FACT. SO FOR ANYONE COMPLAINING YOU need to re-evaluate what you say, its hypocritical if you ask me. 94% wasted energy and people are complaining about HHO.....
inegma29 4 years ago
Yeah, but the 6% efficiency isn't because your using gasoline, it's due to losses regardless of what's being burned.
If you burned straight HHO gas you efficency wouldn't go up significently. So you basically use battery power, which can be converted into motion at nearly 90% eff, to HHO gas. Even if the conversion is 100%, your still gonna get only around your 6% back out from motion. Gas or HHO, it doesn't matter to the car.
BugNuggets 4 years ago
I agree that some is lost in mechanical transfer but once again MOST OF GAS GOES UP IN HEAT ENERGY WITHIN THE COMBUSTION CHAMBER AND FURTHER WASTED AS IT IS BURNED IN THE CAT, SINCE YOU ARE GETTING SPECIFIC HERE ;)
inegma29 4 years ago
...MOST OF HHO GOES UP IN HEAT ENERGY WITHIN THE COMBUSTION CHAMBER...
Once again, the same issue exists with HHO gas.
Very little gas is lost via the catalytic converter, dwarfed by the other losses in energy.
BugNuggets 4 years ago
Not to mention the few cubic inches of explosive mixture in the hoses is minute compared to the 4oo bounds of acetylene and oxygen in highly compressed bottles.
GSpotter63 4 years ago
Hope all you guys know that it takes almost three times as much energy to convert a molecule of water into "HHO" as the amount produced by burning it?
Really all this guy is doing is hurting the environment and wasting energy, because the electricity he uses to split the H and O atoms comes from a big ol' power plant.
goughmax 4 years ago 2
All this man is doing is using radio frequency modulation matching that of hydrogen and Oxygen to help break the molecular bonding of the molecules and separate the 3 atoms. The now free atoms rise to the top of the water where the hydrogen is mixed with the O2 and burnt. If the amount of energy required to split the water molecule is less than the cost of producing the same amount o gasoline then there is no reason it should not be employed.
GSpotter63 4 years ago
Amen "GSpotter63". Its like NASA's new muscle repair system. They use ONLY a certain frequency of infrared RATHER THAN THE WHOLE INFRARED SPECTRUM. By finding the week spot(or exact spot) you waste less energy producing the same results. I don't think its defying laws I think its new laws that need to be added into the equation. 2+2=4 2+2=4-2
inegma29 4 years ago
That is why a small child can get a large man swinging very high in a playground swing set. Using feeble small pushes timed with the swinging, each little push adds to the previous push, push enough and he goes over the top. If the small pushes were out of sync with the swinger, many of the pushes would be wasted. Such is the difference between this and traditional water electrolysis.
GSpotter63 4 years ago
Your example is accurate. But if you could (and you can) mathmatically add up all the energy expended by the child pushing the adult it would be greater then the energy required for a gorilla to achieve the same results in 1 push.
Harmonic frequencies don't reduce the total amount of energy required. Energy = Force x distance. Harmonic freq. lets you reduce the force required, but the distance increase proportionally.
BugNuggets 4 years ago
That's not the point. A constant stream of pushes (like a steady wind) will push the swinger forward even when the swinger is swinging backward therefore slowing him down and wasting energy. Pulse the same amount of wind in small bursts, only when he is moving forward, will increase efficiency.
GSpotter63 4 years ago
Traditional electrolysis uses a steady stream of electricity (like a steady stream of wind) to break the molecular bond. This method of modulation is much more affective. So using standard mathematical equations of electrolysis will not work here.
GSpotter63 4 years ago
PT1. Your example is flawed by assuming the rider of the swing needs to make the return trip. In your example, the goal is for the swing to reach a higher energy state, say a peak rotation displacement of 40° from vertical. Optimally, a single push sending the rider to that point would be best, but like you say, electrolyses is a strong wind and tends to overshoot a bit, thus heating the solution.
BugNuggets 4 years ago
PT2 Once the rider reaches 40°, he "stops" and holds that position. He now has energy available for use (i.e. he can be burned). Harmonics might remove the overshoot because your applying smaller pushes, but my point still stands, the energy to get the rider to 40° is the same, and is more then the energy that can be returned by burning him.
BugNuggets 4 years ago
But the rider does not stay at " 40° from vertical from vertical" after reaching that point he swings back regaining momentum to the 40° in the rear and stops, and moves forward again. That is the time he receives the next push.
GSpotter63 4 years ago
Let's not forget that we are not talking about a swing here. We are talking about atoms, Atoms consist of electrons that go around and around in circles not back and forth. There is no" 40° from vertical from vertical" in an atom.
GSpotter63 4 years ago
The 40° angle represents separation of the h2 and the O atoms, AKA a higher energy state. Once the atoms separate there is no more swinging action. That was your goal with the small pushes right? To separate the atoms so they contained chemical energy again?
They wait there until they are reacted again, at which point they fall to the ground and the whole thing starts over.
BugNuggets 4 years ago
look around majority of billionaires are linked to oil. Why would they want to change any thing.if they wana raise gass to 5 bucks whos stoppin them
Trewstory189B 4 years ago
I hope his negotiations with the government go no further than sales for military use. This should remain privatized.
I wonder if we'll eventually be taxed on water.
AdamB5000 4 years ago
eveytime we go to the gas pumps we are paying for bush's little chess games. hope this really works out
glacierfish 4 years ago
.................................
WRITERCAB 4 years ago 2
I bet you never hear about this again. No, not because he's been murdered, but because it's a bunch of baloney. Amazing how FOX fall for all these scams.
Gruntol5 4 years ago
the government has interest? great there gonna kill him like stan mayer
humantestdummy 4 years ago
and what good have you done lately ? mr.negative
HOPPERFZR 4 years ago
The amazing thing about this is that the Fox reporter knows so little about science that he doesn't even realise how much of a dick he's being. HHO gas?!! HAHAHAH! What an idiot. Hydrogen and Oxygen fuel is nothing new. Nor is electrolysis. This is american stupidity at its prime!
jasoneunson 4 years ago
Ahaha this is priceless, Amazing, Hurray, Amen, etc... but one detail, bottled water costs more per gallon than gasoline, So even if this could be the future, It will cost more than current fuel, plus transitioning all the electro-mechanical systems and support infrastructure would be cost prohibitive.
Drax812 4 years ago
bottled water is expesive because of the bottle not the water, the water is very cheap. problem is you need electrolisis wich involves another energy source. i don-t know if this problem has been solved or not.
aksdk 4 years ago
ahh...
Drax812 4 years ago
oh yeah and that whole bottles water comparison to gasoline is based on the price of single or two serving bottles not by the gallon. I remember seeing those signs and laughing my ass off. Try checking to see how much you pay for a gallon of water from the tap, or rain water, or even go expensive and compare to a GALLON of filtered/bottled water. It's still much cheaper than gasoline.
Tencion 4 years ago
If they'll make it work on dirty water great, I have a feeling the system will be so particular deposits from minerals in non treated water would damage the engines or clog ion channels
Drax812 4 years ago
hehehe....cool...so you get energy from water ...by electrolysis huh...uhm so where do u get electricity?? so its energy from water by electricity from power plants powered by fuel..so were back to fuel...lolz...
luckyalegads 4 years ago
DarkRezo suck a dick you british dumbass. you're comment was the stupidest thing i've read on youtube. you're an idiot, i'll shove a crumpet up your ass.
bronco3331 4 years ago
Imagine a generator in your basement to power the machine that produced the fuel to power your generator. A big generator that powers everything on your property and it's exhaust condensing into a storage tank of water stockpiled to start this beatiful renewable process all over again. Imagine if you could drink the stuff on top of that. All for a one time cost. Yeah, this guy is so dead.
TwisterTail 4 years ago
If conversion to water as fuel really happened, would it eventually rain all the time?
TwisterTail 4 years ago
right. It fells hot on the hand but it burns alloy ? heh good fraud m8s
The only thing powerful enough and much like this would be cold fusion, but we'r far from it.
Water is pretty much useless for us, apart from running the whole living organism world.
DarkRezo 4 years ago
he's a dead man!
Mistercharming 4 years ago
That is freakin awsome
REINLOTH88 4 years ago
Well there is an inventor who has built a rocket pack that uses Hydrogen Peroxide as a fuel source. By using a catalyst,it turns into steam and oxygen.
Potrimpo 4 years ago
Potrimpo...Hydrogen Peroxide in the higher concentrations is a known energetic propellant (and a dangerous one at that). It's been used in rocketry for ages! However, water won't serve as an energy source unless we can somehow tap into those fusion powers (or something equally amazing)!
This reminds me of That 70s show..."It runs on water man!!!" (they are all completely baked)
flyingfish555 4 years ago
HHO gas? Sounds like a semi-fraud to me, especially as that's water H2O - HHO - I doubt there can be a bond between H and H and O at the same time, anyway that would require a cyclic molecule or actualy HOHO (also impossible) or H2O2 (fairly dangerous) Unless the guy come up with a specific formula, I don't believe him at all.
MegaJaMs 4 years ago
you know the 2 in H2O is a subscript, and i assume theres 2 elements of H in water, so HHO gas is just the same as evaporated water.
darkenlightenment 4 years ago
Nah, not exactly, if that was the case, you couldn't weld with it, and you obviously can. So the gas must be unbonded H and O, Thus H2 and O2 molecules. Except the inventer claim otherwise, he claim the bond is "different", whatever that means. That is why I wrote about the actual bond above, I do know what water is, but I don't know how to subscript here.
MegaJaMs 4 years ago
ah, i was just thinking maybe you didnt know the 2 was just there as reference.
you'd be surprised how many people i know think that the "2" is an element -_-'
darkenlightenment 4 years ago
umm...use the water up? are you serious? like...use the countless trillions of gallons of oceans up, even though the exhaust would be water vapor, which would become water again? think about what you just asked.
amishsamurai 4 years ago
haha no more fossil fuels now no more water
jayson8o8 4 years ago
use water? WTF what happens when you use the water up?
phabianx 4 years ago
Are you a fucking idiot? The gas becomes water again, which in turn evaporates in to the atmosphere, which then becomes percipitation.
fiascofreak 4 years ago
Cool
crazydrunkendriver 4 years ago
The thing that really bothers me about this is that I KNOW other people have come up with the same process before. This HHO gas they speak of is sometimes referred to as Brown's Gas, and I have a manual from abotu 3 years ago instructing how to build the same type of electrolytic device that this guy supposedly just patented.
mcclth 4 years ago
This was.. kinda a couple of years ago o_o So the manual you have might be made after that machine he invented o_O His car is a '94, if you didn't hear in the video
Moritsune 4 years ago
I was judging that the date the video was added was closer to the date of this news report, but I am obviously not sure. Good point though! I guess I could look up the patent itself.
mcclth 4 years ago
Last comment was to mcclth D:
Moritsune 4 years ago
wtf so sweet i saving to fav
XfireBf2Skatetopia 4 years ago
this is (if its real) like the ethonal. pointless. still just as bad if not worse
biomiketgr 4 years ago
I have a BS in Chemical Engineering, a MS in Materials Engineering and am a TA in chemistry. I have talked to my PhD advisors about this, none of us can prove the thermodynamics of how this works. What this video shows is impossible at face value.
fuerstjd 4 years ago
that is awesome! i wonder what would happen if you peed in the tank maybe it might be too much of an impurity
mrjimmythekid 4 years ago
BS!!!!!!!!!!!!
You can't alter the laws of thermodynamics. You can't get more energy out than you put in.
Sure you can produce hydrogen from water by hydraulosis, but that takes energy. And due to the inevitable inefficiencies, you can't get more energy back by running the chemical process in reverse.
Just another example of our public school educational system.
jbszee 4 years ago
wait wait so this guy and the other guy John K. discovered this in the same time? how come all so sudden? this thing is confusing me but il prob be dead until this thing launches or something
JJJwatch 4 years ago
yea even though its getting rid of fossil fuels, its waisting more water than ever, and if global warmin is reall, this would not really help us any unlesss we get permission to use recycled water for drinking water.
shadowelite141 4 years ago
huh? how come the world isnt making a big deal of this yet?? ITS GONA REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING YAAAAAAAAAAAAAY!!! but very suspicious....BUT YAAAAY!!!! this is gona bother me for a long time
JJJwatch 4 years ago
Yeah but how much energy does it take to convert it?
hambonepeterson 4 years ago
absolutely incredible, this individual is brilliant.
AvenSkyGazer 4 years ago
"We better hope the water prices don't go up like the gas" -_-; If this goes global you won't be paying for gas AT ALL
AnimaRaptor 4 years ago
lets also hope that guy wont get assainated by one of those oil companies. jk
undiscoveredmidget 4 years ago
They could of course research this temselves... but aparently that's forward thinking ;)
AnimaRaptor 4 years ago
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
elizarelizarelizar 4 years ago
that was tight
Themightygunslinger 4 years ago
are you kidding?? It'd be killing 4 birds with half a stone! Water owns
JFranciz34 4 years ago 2
wow! Tha seo sgoinneil! He better get himself a body guard... there's going to be a hell of a lot of scared (and already rich) oil barons.
Sgleog 4 years ago
holy crap thats awesome!!!
ChocolateKookies 4 years ago
Oh boy, he's gonna be rich!
masterchief3k 4 years ago
That guys is going to be one rich son of a bitch.
Internesting 4 years ago
Considering, however, that the Earth is covered in 3/4 water, and that the gas turns back into water after it's exaustion, PLUS the fact that a car requires only 4 oz for 100 miles of travel, this could possibly be the best and safest way to cut down on oil reliance and gas pollution. It'd be killing two birds with one stone.
Xaoz 4 years ago
lmao great idea
but his speedometer reads 7mph
jetsfan2691 4 years ago
Why the hell did Youtube feature a crappy water experiment in a glass and not this great video? I don't know.
gspahr 4 years ago
Exactly! I cam here from that stupid video as well.
Makes you wonder...
oh
itslegit 4 years ago
...it turns back into water...
:]
AeronicLove 4 years ago
sweetness
BrandoBurger 4 years ago
i dunno if i believe this one
steeda049 4 years ago
to answer tony the only reason it isnt being used everywhere, is because if this kind of technology was released to public, gas companies would go bankrupt, and the governemnt would loose soooo much money, and they dont want to do that now do they ???
chumdog 4 years ago
coool
skaterboy727 4 years ago
you know, if this is so amazing and revolutionary, why isn't it being used EVERYWHERE like is should be?
tonyisdashiz 4 years ago
because it was patented like the narrator said therefor it is at the discretion of the man who made it to wether it is used for an alternative source of power...
nogoodones 4 years ago
y need water and gas if it can run on water? can it use salt water. this doesnt make sense
biomiketgr 4 years ago