Is hydrogen the future of motoring?

R.O.R

From http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14979817

BBC Website wrote:

The UK's first commercial hydrogen filling station has opened in Swindon


The opening of the UK's first public refuelling station for hydrogen vehicles in Swindon is part of efforts to create a "hydrogen highway" along the M4 motorway.

It is also seen as an important step in a UK-wide scheme to make hydrogen vehicles a viable alternative to petrol-driven cars.

"A hydrogen car is much cleaner than a conventional car," says Professor Kevin Kendall, a hydrogen and fuel cell expert from Birmingham University.
"This will clean up our cities enormously," he says in an interview with BBC News. "No emissions whatsoever."

Hydrogen-powered cars rely on a fuel cell that takes oxygen from the air and combines it with hydrogen from a tank to create electricity.

The electricity is used to power electric motors, which turn the car's wheels.
As such, hydrogen-powered cars can be seen as electric vehicles that are not held back by the limited range of batteries.

"Your electric battery car does 60 miles [100km], this does 300 miles. It fills in five minutes rather than five hours," says Professor Kendall.
"This is the one for the future, there's no doubt in my mind."

'Cheaper than electricity'

Creating a hydrogen refuelling infrastructure is essential for the future of hydrogen-powered motoring, which some carmakers see as the eventual future of so-called zero-emissions motoring.

"For long-distance driving, hydrogen fuel cells are very promising," according to Dieter Zetsche, chief executive of Daimler, the owner of Mercedes and Smart cars.

Rolling out the infrastructure will not be cheap, of course, but it might be a more cost-effective solution than the creation of a battery recharging infrastructure for conventional electric cars, says Dr Zetsche.

"For battery electric vehicles, you'll need infrastructure that is probably more costly than hydrogen," he insists.

"More charging stations mean more parking places are needed because it takes longer for them to refuel."

According to current estimates, creating a nationwide hydrogen refuelling infrastructure in Germany would cost between 1bn and 1.4bn euros ($1.4bn-$1.9bn; £870m-£1.2bn), though the eventual cost could be half that, Dr Zetsche says.

"So the cost is definitely not an obstacle to go into this area," he says.

There was a report on BBC news this morning, live from the 1 pump in Swindon - at the Honda plant.

Apparently there are 2 Hydrogen powered cars in Europe. The Civic they had to drive up to the pump apparently cost £9,500,000.

Nothing more than a publicity stunt at the moment, but interesting to see progress is being made.

Big Nasty

Yes, and electric cars will be like mini discs, obsolete before they become popular! :pac:

flanzer

Imagine trying to remap one of those.... any slight mistake and you could end up on Jupiter!

smash

Once it can be produced a lot cheaper it will be the future of motoring in my opinion.

Sesshoumaru

It's good to see more investment like this in electric vehicles.

Eric Cartman

hydrogen cars were always the future

Owen

MCMLXXV wrote: »

Yes, and electric cars will be like mini discs, obsolete before they become popular! :pac:

There are times a post makes me want to kiss the poster, or at least give him a reacharound. This is one of those posts. Full of win!

hydrogenengine

Ask any of our experts, college professors, SEAI etc, they will all tell you hydrogen can only be regarded as an energy carrier and our hydrogen economy is possibly 50 years away. Check out the internet and you will see numerous people selling water for gas kits for engine conversions. I have been unable to find one manufacturer/supplier who will offer a money back guarantee or in fact tell you how to operate such a device, they are mostly referred to as hho kits,
not to be mistaken with an electric kettle but they can actually boil water too?
Do they work? none that I have bought but I have been foolish enough to part with my money for many such devices and some weeks later put in the skip.

I became interested in the subject some three years ago after becoming an unemployed professional, something to pass the time with. At first I contacted most of our third level Institutes to be told I was mad, Hydrogen is very difficult, expensive and very dangerous to produce, energy required is much greater than the energy output. I began to experiment.
The days become long when one is without a job and short of cash,
I had nothing to loose and if the professors were correct possibly my life but as always I am like a dog with a bone.

OK, here are some facts, Electrolysis of water is a lot easier than most believe, it just takes some low voltage electricity and some electrodes and of course an additive to make the water more electro conductive and I do not mean baking soda, it corrodes the electrodes.

Two years on my 08 Mercedes C220 is a hydrogen hybrid, mpg was at most 48 on a long journey but with a 50 euro conversion achieves 60mpg within ten miles and within twenty miles will achieve 65-70mpg with more power.
Experts will say the engine will blow but 60,000 miles later its running better than ever because its clean burning.
There is an optimum energy input, any excess will result in waste and heat up such a device. I have one on my oil fired boiler and efficiency has improved by 16%. I simply use less oil and one litre of water per month.
Let me put this in perspective, one litre of petrol currently will cost you one euro and fifty cent, this will also buy you 8kwh electricity and you can easily convert this into 2200 litres of a hydrogen/oxygen gas ( two thousand two hundred litres) is it any wonder the powers that be do not want this technology known. Testing on a Scania 420 has shown in excess of 20% improved fuel economy and I am now working on a highly efficient CHP which will provide heating and electricity for my home. Smart metering feed in tarrif is just ten cent a kw which will result in my fuel cost less than zero.Take the Prius Hybrid which has 27kw battery storage, the batteries are well capable of making hydrogen as the sole fuel for the engine and require recharge just once a week depending on mileage, The solutions are already known but the powers that be will tell you it simply cannot be done. Its about carbon tax and Revenue collection.
A prominent TV personality once told me, if you were from silicone valley everyone would say you are a genius but because you are Irish you are talking rubbish. I can imagine some of the comments I will get here but I will provide evidence when the time is right. Hydrogen injection despite all claims does actually increase emissions because more fuel is being burned that would otherwise go out through the exhaust, emissions are reduced by better mpg. Hybrid conversions are a possible retro-fit solution for all existing petrol and diesel engines and home heating and with rising fuel cost, Will our Government eventually tax rainwater ?

Tomk1

I was at a Cork Skeptics meeting on Nuclear energy, where the professor said that Hydrogen cars will be extremely dangerous, 'Hydrogen has a way of creeping out, if it can escape it will'

We will have to see.

Electric cars where the way of the future in 1891

heate

Hydrogen is dangerous if not stored properly - but this is an issue that can be resolved - they will arrive at a safe way of storing it - and yeh it will eventually leak out - but not many people leave their cars for huge amounts of time without using them and if it does leak out; it ain't gonna kill us!
It is the future and this argument about oh you need electricity to for the separation of element. Yes! You do well done but eh oh wait - make electricity from renewable sources perhaps!

unkel

R.O.R wrote: »

There was a report on BBC news this morning, live from the 1 pump in Swindon - at the Honda plant.

Apparently there are 2 Hydrogen powered cars in Europe.

LOL, what is it with Japanese companies claiming to have come up with an invention / innovation and people believe them too?

BMW had hydrogen cars driving around about 5 years ago

unkel

hydrogenengine wrote: »

Ask any of our experts, college professors, SEAI etc, they will all tell you hydrogen can only be regarded as an energy carrier

That's the beauty of it! Storage is expensive and inefficient, but possible all the same. Solution for Ireland:

1. Create massive reservoir a few hundred meters above sea level somewhere on the west coast. This reservoir is an energy buffer

2. Wind energy will fill the reservoir with sea water when it is windy

3. Hydro (water flowing back into the Ocean through hydro electric plant) creates electricity and feeds it into the grid. When there is oversupply, the electricity will be used to create hydrogen

4. Hydrogen supply is used for transport energy requirements

Zero emissions after the infastructure has been built. Actually never bloody mind zero emissions, less dependency on Russia (gas) and the Arabic world (oil) and a massive and permanent cash inflow for the state

Lex Luthor

Cars will have H2 sensors on them to check for leaks...if it detects, then it will probably incorporate a shut off valve

In all my years of installing & maintaining H2 sensors, once its properly contained I have yet to see a leak.

alias no.9

hydrogenengine wrote: »

Two years on my 08 Mercedes C220 is a hydrogen hybrid, mpg was at most 48 on a long journey but with a 50 euro conversion achieves 60mpg within ten miles and within twenty miles will achieve 65-70mpg with more power.

I'd certainly be interested in how you've set this up i.e. how do you store the gas in the car, where do you introduce it to the fuel/air, how do you meter it, etc...

hydrogenengine wrote: »

Hydrogen injection despite all claims does actually increase emissions because more fuel is being burned that would otherwise go out through the exhaust, emissions are reduced by better mpg.

This doesn't really make any sense, co2 emissions are just another way of stating fuel consumption, carbon that goes in from the fuel comes out as co2. No engine is 100% efficient but in any modern car with electronic fuel injection, there is negligible HC and CO getting past the catalytic converter once that has warmed up.

Adding a hydrogen / oxygen mix may see more efficient combustion in the cylinder and less work for the cat and even lower HC and CO emissions, but there simply isn't enough available carbon to increase CO2 emissions.

Perhaps you were referring to NOx emissions which could increase in a leaner burning engine?

hydrogenengine

There is no gas storage required, the gas is produced on demand with low voltage from the battery/charging voltage, and is then injected via the air intake just before the turbo. One litre of water decomposed will produce 1860 litres of gas so top up with a quarter litre of water every week, depending on mileage.
The particulate filter was due to burn off at 56,400km but when tested at 50,000 had just 1% carbon, possibly there since before installation at 20,000 miles. The setup/emissions are checked using Snap On exhaust gas analyzer
which is a must have to regulate the amount of gas input, too much gas is worse than less. When the gas burns o2 reduces but co2 will increase at optimum combustion, too much gas will increase Nox emissions.
The setup is a fairly exact science gained simply from experience and proper test equipment.

hydrogenengine

Its all about Energy,

Our Energy providers are pricing themselves out of the market, the consumer has little choice but to pay up. The price of crude is falling due to reduced demand and yet the price at the pumps is rising, The Irish Government are taking advantage without having the courtesy of telling us, ask any oil distributer. Hydrogen is the cheapest abundant fuel available,
The short term future I believe will be micro chp wherby we can provide our own energy needs and at low cost compared to any other fossil fuel.

Hydrogen when burned reverts to water, it is non toxic and harmless to humans
and is zero emissions. It is actually less dangerous than petrol as it dissipates into the atmosphere extremely fast and once diluted cannot ignite, Would you light a match at your petrol tank, unlikely as the fumes alone would ignite, with hydrogen it will not ignite unless the flame is applied at source. High pressure storage of hydrogen can be dangerous therefore produce on demand and it is within reach for us all to make our own fuel.
Why do you think the experts will say it cannot be done?? Figure it out for yourself.

Davidth88

very interesting posts .

Watching with interest , I always thought this was the way ahead .

copeyhagen

very very interesting stuff hydrogenengine.

Big Nasty

Owen wrote: »

There are times a post makes me want to kiss the poster, or at least give him a reacharound. This is one of those posts. Full of win!

No kissing Owen - it's too personal, even for a thanks whore!

n97 mini

unkel wrote: »

LOL, what is it with Japanese companies claiming to have come up with an invention / innovation and people believe them too?

BMW had hydrogen cars driving around about 5 years ago

Spot the BMW fanboi! That BMW yoke didn't have a fuel cell, it burned hydrogen, which is the pig ignorant way of making a "hydrogen powered" car. IIRC it did something like 5 mpg on hydrogen and BMW would have been better sticking with petrol.

nessan22

surely hydrogen is the future, but its gonna take time to be popular as needs more R&D.

seamus

Hydrogen could be the future, but it's still out of reach of the normal motorist while EV makes inroads into affordability and delivery mechanisms.

In terms of delivery, it's primary problem is that it has much greater supply costs than plain old EV. Even if refuelling stations just bring in seawater and create the hydrogen onsite, that still costs money to ship and store. EVs cut out the middle man so there's no transitory fuel type.

However for the moment it does refuel a whole lot faster, it has twice the range of an EV, and it's a familiar delivery mechanism that people will be comfortable with. Also since a pure H2 vehicle is effectively an EV with a fuel cell bolted on, these vehicles will be able to take advantage of any jumps in the EV technology apart from the battery.

It could also just be another transitory vehicle type. Since they're effectively just EVs with a different power source, then there's no reason why you couldn't run a battery and H2 system in tandem. Battery goes till it runs out, then it switches to the more expensive hydrogen to run the car and recharge while you drive. The cost of such a dual setup would be a minimal increase (on H2-only cars), but it could give EVs a range that petrol or diesel vehicles could only dream of.

As battery technologies improve, it will make more sense to only use battery tech and not H2, and it would even be relatively cheap and simple to convert a H2 car to a pure EV.

In reality it's effectively a format war. H2 and EV each have their own strengths. The consumer will decide who lives and who dies.

My suspicion is that unless someone manages to bring a €30,000 H2 car to market within five years, and they manage to not have any "exploding car" incidents, then they stand a chance. Safety will be the number one hot topic. Any serious incidents involving leaked hydrogen and people just won't go for it.

cormac_byrne

Yes Hydrogen is the future of motoring,
but they will be fuel cell (i.e. electric) cars rather than combustion engine cars.

So the electric car is the future it will just have fuel cells rather than batteries to provide the power.

Not having batteries to capture braking energy (a la todays hybrid cars) it will use capacitors instead.

The hydrogen to power the cells will be stored in a safe solid state form in a low pressure cartridge rather than in a dangerous high pressure gas cylinder.

Here are solid state hydrogen cartridges available now
(and easily rechargeable from solar etc...)

http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/electronics.htm

and applying it to a car

http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/automotive.htm

http://www.riversimple.com

"While the rest of the world invests in stupid electric cars that don't work or hybrids which are ineffectual, Leicester council have signed an agreement which will see 30 hydrogen fuelled cars on the city streets. Made by Riversimple, a small Shropshire- based company, these tiny cars represent the future. Because instead of running on electricity from the mains, its produced by a chemical reaction within the car itself. A reaction that produces nothing but heat and water. This is the future. "
Jeremy Clarkson - June 2010

alias no.9

hydrogenengine wrote: »

There is no gas storage required, the gas is produced on demand with low voltage from the battery/charging voltage, and is then injected via the air intake just before the turbo. One litre of water decomposed will produce 1860 litres of gas so top up with a quarter litre of water every week, depending on mileage.
The particulate filter was due to burn off at 56,400km but when tested at 50,000 had just 1% carbon, possibly there since before installation at 20,000 miles. The setup/emissions are checked using Snap On exhaust gas analyzer
which is a must have to regulate the amount of gas input, too much gas is worse than less. When the gas burns o2 reduces but co2 will increase at optimum combustion, too much gas will increase Nox emissions.
The setup is a fairly exact science gained simply from experience and proper test equipment.

So how does this setup take account of varying engine speeds. A 12v electrolysis cell will be producing gas at a pretty constant rate. Volumetric air intake will vary almost proportionally with engine speed. You state yourself that too much gas increases the NOx, so how do you account for engine speed?
I don't doubt that you can get a cleaner burn by adding the gasses, I just dont see how that can be done in a balanced manner over the rev range with the setup you describe.

cormac_byrne

hydrogenengine wrote: »

There is no gas storage required, the gas is produced on demand with low voltage from the battery/charging voltage, and is then injected via the air intake just before the turbo. One litre of water decomposed will produce 1860 litres of gas so top up with a quarter litre of water every week, depending on mileage.
The particulate filter was due to burn off at 56,400km but when tested at 50,000 had just 1% carbon, possibly there since before installation at 20,000 miles. The setup/emissions are checked using Snap On exhaust gas analyzer
which is a must have to regulate the amount of gas input, too much gas is worse than less. When the gas burns o2 reduces but co2 will increase at optimum combustion, too much gas will increase Nox emissions.
The setup is a fairly exact science gained simply from experience and proper test equipment.

What's being described above is simply a scam, if it worked it would be an example of a perpetual motion machine.

http://aardvark.co.nz/hho.shtml

Hal1

It's a great idea and I'm all for it but there's just too much money in oil for them to offer any alternative fuels at the moment. Sure the oil compaines most likely have all the exclusive rights and patents in place to make sure alternative fuels don't make it to the consumer. Until such a time they see fit. So unless you make biodiesel your suckered into paying the cartel price for fuel.

YouTookMyName

Whoever figures a way to transport it safely becomes a millionaire no?

seamus

YouTookMyName wrote: »

Whoever figures a way to transport it safely becomes a millionaire no?

You wouldn't transport hydrogen. Not in big tankers anyway, too great a risk. As I mention, you would transport water to refueling stations. Probably not water from the mains, that could be quite expensive.
The station itself would then have the necessary equipment for generating the hydrogen on demand and could also store and sell on the oxygen. Producing hydrogen isn't like refining crude oil, the equipment wouldn't be very expensive or complicated.

But you might be right - whoever figures out the most economical delivery system could be a millionaire.

Vicxas

seamus wrote: »

You wouldn't transport hydrogen. Not in big tankers anyway, too great a risk. As I mention, you would transport water to refueling stations. Probably not water from the mains, that could be quite expensive.
The station itself would then have the necessary equipment for generating the hydrogen on demand and could also store and sell on the oxygen. Producing hydrogen isn't like refining crude oil, the equipment wouldn't be very expensive or complicated.

But you might be right - whoever figures out the most economical delivery system could be a millionaire.

How difficult is it to transfer from water to Hydrogen, because I wouldnt want your run of the mill garage attendant doing this if its dangerous...

Matt Simis

n97 mini wrote: »

Spot the BMW fanboi! That BMW yoke didn't have a fuel cell, it burned hydrogen, which is the pig ignorant way of making a "hydrogen powered" car. IIRC it did something like 5 mpg on hydrogen and BMW would have been better sticking with petrol.

I still suspect the fuel cell/EV approach will basically suck to drive though but yes, having read the Hydrogen7 Wiki page, the BMW car of 2007 is bizarrely limited.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_Hydrogen_7

qwytre

I hope not, I just heard a beautiful sound from a jaguar xk as it pulled out of a side street.

seamus

Vicxas wrote: »

How difficult is it to transfer from water to Hydrogen, because I wouldnt want your run of the mill garage attendant doing this if its dangerous...

It's quite easy actually. Effectively two wires running into a tank of water with a current flowing into them. It's done by junior cert students on a small scale in the lab.
Production on a station's scale would happen completely automatically - overnight or something similar. At the push of a button anyway. You wouldn't have a pleb standing there swirling a big wooden stick in the mixture

The production process isn't actually dangerous in the slightest, the most dangerous part is compressing and storing the oxegen and hydrogen gasses it creates.

jamieh

cormac_byrne wrote: »

What's being described above is simply a scam, if it worked it would be an example of a perpetual motion machine.

http://aardvark.co.nz/hho.shtml

Hi all,

I can assure you that the product 'hydrogenengine' has developed is not a scam.

He is a friend of mine and fit the unit into my 2005 BMW 320Cd MSport a number of months ago.

I have noticed a definite increase in MPG, ~18% and there is without doubt more poke.

I have seen the unit in other cars/jeeps/trucks and talked to the owners, who are all reporting similar results to me.

Don't ask me how it works because it's totally over my head , but I can assure ye that he's a genuine guy with a serious product!

Matt Simis

Ive been looking at HHO Injection for a while now. Ive even bought a car to test it out on. Will update ASAP.

Hydrogenengine, if you are legit, contact me on this!

hydrogenengine

alias no.9 wrote: »

So how does this setup take account of varying engine speeds. A 12v electrolysis cell will be producing gas at a pretty constant rate. Volumetric air intake will vary almost proportionally with engine speed. You state yourself that too much gas increases the NOx, so how do you account for engine speed?
I don't doubt that you can get a cleaner burn by adding the gasses, I just dont see how that can be done in a balanced manner over the rev range with the setup you describe.

There are some electronics to control the gas input, the device has two cells in one, the first cell operates continuous from the time the engine is started, the second cell only operates when the engine reaches 2000rpm so town and motorway driving is considered.
For those of you interested in fuel cells check out www.thefuelcellstore.com
You will note the cost of producing pure hydrogen and then the amount of hydrogen that is required to run the cell to obtain electricity, I rest my case.
Metal Hydride is the safest means to store hydrogen and has a slow release rate but would be adequate for small engines. I will not disclose my experience in running an engine on hydrogen alone but I will state that ignition timing must be at close to TDC. This is difficult with some engines as they are difficult to remap. Ford developed a V10 hydrogen engine for F1 which was discounted due to sponsorship from oil companies.

hydrogenengine

Matt Simis wrote: »

I still suspect the fuel cell/EV approach will basically suck to drive though but yes, having read the Hydrogen7 Wiki page, the BMW car of 2007 is bizarrely limited.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_Hydrogen_7

The best alternative I have seen is the Chevy Volt, the electric engine is the primary power drive train and the petrol engine is secondary and cuts in when battery is exhausted, this car is a prototype as yet and has not been put into production, currently due to high cost, Driving range on the electric motor is some forty miles which would suit a lot of people.

Before I answer any more questions on making hydrogen there are a few basis safety measures that must be considered for anyone intending to experiment.

Think of hydrogen as electricity going through a wire, its continuous, if you light a match to one end of a pipe the flame will immediately jump back to the source and cause explosion. The gas flame must be protected by a flashback arrestor or the pipe inserted into a water tank with an independent gas pipe at exit, the flame will not jump through water. There is no flame like petrol or diesel, its an instant flash, Develop a safety plan first.

opinion guy

hydrogenengine wrote: »

OK, here are some facts, Electrolysis of water is a lot easier than most believe, it just takes some low voltage electricity and some electrodes and of course an additive to make the water more electro conductive and I do not mean baking soda, it corrodes the electrodes.

Two years on my 08 Mercedes C220 is a hydrogen hybrid, mpg was at most 48 on a long journey but with a 50 euro conversion achieves 60mpg within ten miles and within twenty miles will achieve 65-70mpg with more power.
Experts will say the engine will blow but 60,000 miles later its running better than ever because its clean burning.
There is an optimum energy input, any excess will result in waste and heat up such a device. I have one on my oil fired boiler and efficiency has improved by 16%. I simply use less oil and one litre of water per month.
Let me put this in perspective, one litre of petrol currently will cost you one euro and fifty cent, this will also buy you 8kwh electricity and you can easily convert this into 2200 litres of a hydrogen/oxygen gas ( two thousand two hundred litres) is it any wonder the powers that be do not want this technology known. Testing on a Scania 420 has shown in excess of 20% improved fuel economy and I am now working on a highly efficient CHP which will provide heating and electricity for my home. Smart metering feed in tarrif is just ten cent a kw which will result in my fuel cost less than zero.Take the Prius Hybrid which has 27kw battery storage, the batteries are well capable of making hydrogen as the sole fuel for the engine and require recharge just once a week depending on mileage, The solutions are already known but the powers that be will tell you it simply cannot be done. Its about carbon tax and Revenue collection.
A prominent TV personality once told me, if you were from silicone valley everyone would say you are a genius but because you are Irish you are talking rubbish. I can imagine some of the comments I will get here but I will provide evidence when the time is right. Hydrogen injection despite all claims does actually increase emissions because more fuel is being burned that would otherwise go out through the exhaust, emissions are reduced by better mpg. Hybrid conversions are a possible retro-fit solution for all existing petrol and diesel engines and home heating and with rising fuel cost, Will our Government eventually tax rainwater ?

hydrogenengine wrote: »

There is no gas storage required, the gas is produced on demand with low voltage from the battery/charging voltage, and is then injected via the air intake just before the turbo. One litre of water decomposed will produce 1860 litres of gas so top up with a quarter litre of water every week, depending on mileage.
The particulate filter was due to burn off at 56,400km but when tested at 50,000 had just 1% carbon, possibly there since before installation at 20,000 miles. The setup/emissions are checked using Snap On exhaust gas analyzer
which is a must have to regulate the amount of gas input, too much gas is worse than less. When the gas burns o2 reduces but co2 will increase at optimum combustion, too much gas will increase Nox emissions.
The setup is a fairly exact science gained simply from experience and proper test equipment.

Okaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy

Could you please explain exactly what you are talking about here ? You are using a small hydrolysis unit to generate hydrogen and inject it into the air fuel mixture is that it ?

What does that do ?
How does this improve efficiency/increase power ?
Whats going on here chemically ?

cormac_byrne

hydrogenengine wrote: »

For those of you interested in fuel cells check out www.thefuelcellstore.com
You will note the cost of producing pure hydrogen and then the amount of hydrogen that is required to run the cell to obtain electricity, I rest my case.
Metal Hydride is the safest means to store hydrogen and has a slow release rate but would be adequate for small engines. I will not disclose my experience in running an engine on hydrogen alone but I will state that ignition timing must be at close to TDC. This is difficult with some engines as they are difficult to remap. Ford developed a V10 hydrogen engine for F1 which was discounted due to sponsorship from oil companies.

That's all very interesting, but has no relevance to the device you have outlined

i.e.

hydrogenengine wrote: »

There is no gas storage required, the gas is produced on demand with low voltage from the battery/charging voltage, and is then injected via the air intake just before the turbo

That device is useless as it will always take more energy (from the alternator) to generate the hydrogen than you will get back from later combusting it.

EI_Flyboy

TLDR: I have an awesome way to save you €€€€€€€, the economy and the planet BUT I'm not going to tell you how...

hydrogenengine wrote: »

Ask any of our experts, college professors, SEAI etc, they will all tell you hydrogen can only be regarded as an energy carrier and our hydrogen economy is possibly 50 years away. Check out the internet and you will see numerous people selling water for gas kits for engine conversions. I have been unable to find one manufacturer/supplier who will offer a money back guarantee or in fact tell you how to operate such a device, they are mostly referred to as hho kits,
not to be mistaken with an electric kettle but they can actually boil water too?
Do they work? none that I have bought but I have been foolish enough to part with my money for many such devices and some weeks later put in the skip.

I became interested in the subject some three years ago after becoming an unemployed professional, something to pass the time with. At first I contacted most of our third level Institutes to be told I was mad, Hydrogen is very difficult, expensive and very dangerous to produce, energy required is much greater than the energy output. I began to experiment.
The days become long when one is without a job and short of cash,
I had nothing to loose and if the professors were correct possibly my life but as always I am like a dog with a bone.

OK, here are some facts, Electrolysis of water is a lot easier than most believe, it just takes some low voltage electricity and some electrodes and of course an additive to make the water more electro conductive and I do not mean baking soda, it corrodes the electrodes.

Two years on my 08 Mercedes C220 is a hydrogen hybrid, mpg was at most 48 on a long journey but with a 50 euro conversion achieves 60mpg within ten miles and within twenty miles will achieve 65-70mpg with more power.
Experts will say the engine will blow but 60,000 miles later its running better than ever because its clean burning.
There is an optimum energy input, any excess will result in waste and heat up such a device. I have one on my oil fired boiler and efficiency has improved by 16%. I simply use less oil and one litre of water per month.
Let me put this in perspective, one litre of petrol currently will cost you one euro and fifty cent, this will also buy you 8kwh electricity and you can easily convert this into 2200 litres of a hydrogen/oxygen gas ( two thousand two hundred litres) is it any wonder the powers that be do not want this technology known. Testing on a Scania 420 has shown in excess of 20% improved fuel economy and I am now working on a highly efficient CHP which will provide heating and electricity for my home. Smart metering feed in tarrif is just ten cent a kw which will result in my fuel cost less than zero.Take the Prius Hybrid which has 27kw battery storage, the batteries are well capable of making hydrogen as the sole fuel for the engine and require recharge just once a week depending on mileage, The solutions are already known but the powers that be will tell you it simply cannot be done. Its about carbon tax and Revenue collection.
A prominent TV personality once told me, if you were from silicone valley everyone would say you are a genius but because you are Irish you are talking rubbish. I can imagine some of the comments I will get here but I will provide evidence when the time is right. Hydrogen injection despite all claims does actually increase emissions because more fuel is being burned that would otherwise go out through the exhaust, emissions are reduced by better mpg. Hybrid conversions are a possible retro-fit solution for all existing petrol and diesel engines and home heating and with rising fuel cost, Will our Government eventually tax rainwater ?

hydrogenengine wrote: »

There is no gas storage required, the gas is produced on demand with low voltage from the battery/charging voltage, and is then injected via the air intake just before the turbo. One litre of water decomposed will produce 1860 litres of gas so top up with a quarter litre of water every week, depending on mileage.
The particulate filter was due to burn off at 56,400km but when tested at 50,000 had just 1% carbon, possibly there since before installation at 20,000 miles. The setup/emissions are checked using Snap On exhaust gas analyzer
which is a must have to regulate the amount of gas input, too much gas is worse than less. When the gas burns o2 reduces but co2 will increase at optimum combustion, too much gas will increase Nox emissions.
The setup is a fairly exact science gained simply from experience and proper test equipment.

hydrogenengine wrote: »

Its all about Energy,

Our Energy providers are pricing themselves out of the market, the consumer has little choice but to pay up. The price of crude is falling due to reduced demand and yet the price at the pumps is rising, The Irish Government are taking advantage without having the courtesy of telling us, ask any oil distributer. Hydrogen is the cheapest abundant fuel available,
The short term future I believe will be micro chp wherby we can provide our own energy needs and at low cost compared to any other fossil fuel.

Hydrogen when burned reverts to water, it is non toxic and harmless to humans
and is zero emissions. It is actually less dangerous than petrol as it dissipates into the atmosphere extremely fast and once diluted cannot ignite, Would you light a match at your petrol tank, unlikely as the fumes alone would ignite, with hydrogen it will not ignite unless the flame is applied at source. High pressure storage of hydrogen can be dangerous therefore produce on demand and it is within reach for us all to make our own fuel.
Why do you think the experts will say it cannot be done?? Figure it out for yourself.

hydrogenengine wrote: »

There are some electronics to control the gas input, the device has two cells in one, the first cell operates continuous from the time the engine is started, the second cell only operates when the engine reaches 2000rpm so town and motorway driving is considered.
For those of you interested in fuel cells check out www.thefuelcellstore.com
You will note the cost of producing pure hydrogen and then the amount of hydrogen that is required to run the cell to obtain electricity, I rest my case.
Metal Hydride is the safest means to store hydrogen and has a slow release rate but would be adequate for small engines. I will not disclose my experience in running an engine on hydrogen alone but I will state that ignition timing must be at close to TDC. This is difficult with some engines as they are difficult to remap. Ford developed a V10 hydrogen engine for F1 which was discounted due to sponsorship from oil companies.

hydrogenengine wrote: »

The best alternative I have seen is the Chevy Volt, the electric engine is the primary power drive train and the petrol engine is secondary and cuts in when battery is exhausted, this car is a prototype as yet and has not been put into production, currently due to high cost, Driving range on the electric motor is some forty miles which would suit a lot of people.

Before I answer any more questions on making hydrogen there are a few basis safety measures that must be considered for anyone intending to experiment.

Think of hydrogen as electricity going through a wire, its continuous, if you light a match to one end of a pipe the flame will immediately jump back to the source and cause explosion. The gas flame must be protected by a flashback arrestor or the pipe inserted into a water tank with an independent gas pipe at exit, the flame will not jump through water. There is no flame like petrol or diesel, its an instant flash, Develop a safety plan first.

That's several minutes of my life I'm never going to get back...

Matt Simis

cormac_byrne wrote: »

That device is useless as it will always take more energy (from the alternator) to generate the hydrogen than you will get back from later combusting it.

Not that Im pro or against HHO injection (Id like to play with it myself and see) but the difference between the "run your car on water" scams and the theory of HHO injection is:

- HHO injection operates like a catalyst, it affects the flame front speed and burning efficiency of the fuel. Petrol cars operate at approx 9% efficiency (25% in theory on the motor alone), any increase in this has a large affect on MPG.
- HHO is not burned directly as an [alternative] fuel therefore the much lower calorific value isnt really a factor in this regard. HHO units typically consume 7-15amps which isnt a huge amount of loading.
- HHO Injection needs to be combined with significant leaning out of the stock fuel mixture (via O2 mods) to allegedly large MPG gains seen online.
- The idea of performance increases via Injection isnt new, I used Water/Meth intake injection to cool the combustion temps, reduce knock and effectively "clean out" the engine on cars before. Water/Meth primarily increases safe boost range but also has a small positive effect on MPG.
- Running an ICE entirely on Hydrogen is possible, but as BMW have shown, woefully inefficient, the amount of time/energy needed to do this from a 12v powered device would be absurd.

Here is an interesting paper (I havent finished reading it) on the effects of Hydroxy on diesel Engines:
http://dpenergy.us/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Effect-of-hydroxy-HHO-gas-addition-on-performance.pdf
I dont know how unbiased it is, but considered it was showing net losses as well as gains pending different scenarios, it seems kinda legit.

However the most suspicious thing about researching HHO Online is its biggest supporters all tend to be blow ins with less than 20posts on the forums I have read.

Soulja boy

Hydrogen is actually quite expensive to pressurise, I don't see it replacing oil, which itself is finite.

Oh well, even 100 years ago we barely had any cars on the road, it might be nice to go back to that.

opinion guy

I got that the hydrogen was intended to function as a catalyst, but the fact that poster hydrogenengine wasn't able to explain that and seems not to understand it himself makes me very suspicious. I would imagine developing such a system as he claims he did would require a good chemistry knowledge, mechanical knowledge and electrical knowledge - he demonstrates none of these.

I mean surely if this works - someone would be able to explain what chemical reactions are going on ? And surely if it did work it would be easy to prove and someone would be running a very successful business and the car manufacturers would be interested.

Matt Simis wrote: »

However the most suspicious thing about researching HHO Online is its biggest supporters all tend to be blow ins with less than 20posts on the forums I have read.

Exactly. The fact that there claims all seem cut and paste and not understood also doesn't help.

Hey Matt though if you get it to work yourself do let us know!!

Soulja boy

That's not entirely true, the fule pumps themselves require pressurised H, and that is expensive, I wasn't commenting on the car's efficiency which is admittedly superb.

opinion guy

Soulja boy wrote: »

That's not entirely true, the fule pumps themselves require pressurised H, and that is expensive, I wasn't commenting on the car's efficiency which is admittedly superb.

Are you talking to me ?

You should probably read the recent posts because we are not talkint about fuel cells at the moment.
Whats being discussed here is using a small electrolysis motor to generate small amounts of hydrogen to inject into a conventional engine to mix with the petrol/diesel and air and provide greater efficiency. Supposedly - thats what one shiller poster is claiming (we think). The rest of us are debating this.

Soulja boy

opinion guy wrote: »

Are you talking to me ?

You should probably read the recent posts because we are not talkint about fuel cells at the moment.
Whats being discussed here is using a small electrolysis motor to generate small amounts of hydrogen to inject into a conventional engine to mix with the petrol/diesel and air and provide greater efficiency. Supposedly - thats what one shiller poster is claiming (we think). The rest of us are debating this.

Actually I was quoting someone else, had the wrong page open, I thought I deleted my post.

seamus

cormac_byrne wrote: »

That device is useless as it will always take more energy (from the alternator) to generate the hydrogen than you will get back from later combusting it.

I just deleted a whole post because I was trying to figure out ways that it would be possible. But it's not.

It's a closed system; you cannot take power from the petrol-driven engine, insert it through the battery and use any process to then get more energy from that petrol-driven engine than you originally took. It's a physical impossibility.

You would have to have a *something* else involved, which is external to the loop. Even if you had a separate car battery doing in the electrolysis, this would be enough. Or a tank of something other than oxygen that you're burning the hydrogen with. But using the car's own electrical system to generate the hydrogen, cannot possibly cause it to yield more energy. It takes 286kJ from the engine to make a hydrogen atom. The absolute maximum amount of energy that you can get back is 286kJ.

There are ways of course that you could fool yourself into thinking that the engine is performing better. If you measure the power output, it will be higher. And if you aren't measuring the power drawn, you will think that you're getting more power to the pedal. You're not.

Any perceived effects are likely to be psychosomatic and drivers adjusting their driving behaviour when testing the hydrogen process.

If hydrogenengine has indeed a foolproof process for easily getting more out of an IC engine, then he should be happy to patent it and submit it for scientific scrutiny and on-track testing.

opinion guy

seamus wrote: »

I just deleted a whole post because I was trying to figure out ways that it would be possible. But it's not.

It's a closed system; you cannot take power from the petrol-driven engine, insert it through the battery and use any process to then get more energy from that petrol-driven engine than you originally took. It's a physical impossibility.

You would have to have a *something* else involved, which is external to the loop. Even if you had a separate car battery doing in the electrolysis, this would be enough. Or a tank of something other than oxygen that you're burning the hydrogen with. But using the car's own electrical system to generate the hydrogen, cannot possibly cause it to yield more energy. It takes 286kJ from the engine to make a hydrogen atom. The absolute maximum amount of energy that you can get back is 286kJ.

There are ways of course that you could fool yourself into thinking that the engine is performing better. If you measure the power output, it will be higher. And if you aren't measuring the power drawn, you will think that you're getting more power to the pedal. You're not.

Any perceived effects are likely to be psychosomatic and drivers adjusting their driving behaviour when testing the hydrogen process.

It isn't a closed system if the hydrogen pumped into the fuel/air mixture is actually changing the chemical reactions taking place. If doing this gives you a more complete or clean burn of the fuel then it is absolutely plausible......... in theory. Don't think of the hydrogen as fuel here - more as a catalyst to ensure you extract more energy from your petrol/diesel. Whether that actually happens in practice or not however, is another story.

If hydrogenengine has indeed a foolproof process for easily getting more out of an IC engine, then he should be happy to patent it and submit it for scientific scrutiny and on-track testing.

hydrogenengine didn't invent this - its all over the net. He also doesn't seem to understand what his own posts are trying to say

seamus

opinion guy wrote: »

It isn't a closed system if the hydrogen pumped into the fuel/air mixture is actually changing the chemical reactions taking place. If doing this gives you a more complete or clean burn of the fuel then it is absolutely plausible......... in theory. Don't think of the hydrogen as fuel here - more as a catalyst to ensure you extract more energy from your petrol/diesel. Whether that actually happens in practice or not however, is another story.

Yeah, got it now, found a link explaining it. My brain said it could work, but I couldn't figure it out.

Basically the same idea as replacing your spark plugs with lasers to get a better ignition.

Matt Simis

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, got it now, found a link explaining it. My brain said it could work, but I couldn't figure it out.

Basically the same idea as replacing your spark plugs with lasers to get a better ignition.

Or another analogy would be (and yes I know its not the same) a belt driven Supercharger. It runs off the engine directly, costing 20-80+HP. However it could give back about 250HP via increased Airflow and minimizing pumping loses, for a net plus. But at its core it still consumes petrol/power to make power.

cormac_byrne

Matt Simis wrote: »

- HHO injection operates like a catalyst, it affects the flame front speed and burning efficiency of the fuel.

Ok, and here is a HHO site which suggests exactly this

http://www.hhocarfuelcell.com/facts/hho_facts.php

It does seem quite plausible, however I would ask 2 questions.

1. Could the volume of gas generated by a tiny electrolysis unit be enough to make a measurable difference.

Most likely No.

2. Is the flame front speed of hydrogen actually faster than vapourised petrol.

No.

http://www.mb-soft.com/public2/hydrogen.html

"Even if all the other hurdles are overcome regarding using Hydrogen as a fuel, it seems to have yet another disadvantage, one that it shares with most other gaseous fuels: the speed at which a flame front travels is fairly slow for the purposes of conventional engines. With an ideal Hydrogen-air mixture, a flame front can travel at around 8 feet/second (at standard atmospheric pressure). Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, Section 7, Gaseous Fuels, graph For comparison, a gasoline-air mixture (compressed) creates a flame front speed that ranges from around 70 feet/second up to around 170 feet/second in normal engines. Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical Engineers, Section 9, Internal Combustion Engines, Flame Speed."

hydrogenengine

opinion guy wrote: »

It isn't a closed system if the hydrogen pumped into the fuel/air mixture is actually changing the chemical reactions taking place. If doing this gives you a more complete or clean burn of the fuel then it is absolutely plausible......... in theory. Don't think of the hydrogen as fuel here - more as a catalyst to ensure you extract more energy from your petrol/diesel. Whether that actually happens in practice or not however, is another story.



hydrogenengine didn't invent this - its all over the net. He also doesn't seem to understand what his own posts are trying to say

Yes you are indeed correct, I didnt invent this, check out Faradays Law, it dates back to 1820. Also I do have a process patent, Someone here asked about the chemical reaction ? A well known Research Institute in Cork are carrying out an electro chemical analysis, this is being funded by a semi state
organisation to prove that the cell efficiency is what I believe it is.
This technology is not beyond most like minded people but to design a cell that will operate at a stable temperature with continuous consistent gas output has been my achievement. When you check out similar products on the net you will note the sellers are on a first name basis without a contactable address, Yes its a scam with most Ive seen, anyone who will tell you their cell gives out 10LPM at 20 amps do not know what they are talking about, buy one and see for yourself, you will in time realise you have just bought an electric kettle, A two litre diesel engine only requires a half litre per min and this can be achieved with just 5-6 amps, 70-80 watts.
The gas acts as a catalyst to increase flame spread with more complete combustion of the primary fuel. You dont have to take my word for it,
there are 17 vehicles in testing, an S320 Mercedes went from 25 to 37mpg driving on the M50, a Lexus G300 3LV6 petrol from 22/23 to 36+ motorway driving and this has been validated by the Lexus main dealer. People have very different driving habbits, most love the extra power and mpg is secondary, for the ones that wish to save fuel they have experienced up to 40% better mpg.
I now mostly supply HGVs simply because they drive at a consistent speed and usually over long distance and they get a better result.
The reason I previously referred to the Prius is because I was given one by a Toyota main dealer who explained that this car gets poor fuel consumption on motorway driving, around 35mpg, Testing was supervised by a main deal
and over seven days the mpg consistently improved to 62mpg.

I am not here to sell my product but merely to inform you that the technology does work when designed and installed properly and there are viable alternative renewables available..

Am I credible you may ask, in 2009 I was selected a participant in the Endeavour Entrepreneur Program at Tralee Institute,

The days of cheap energy is over, cost is rising to almost unaffordable levels, the future is in energy efficiency and until such time as our hydrogen economy evolves this can be considered an interim solution.