Video...Water as a fuel alternative
 

Please check out the video on this page. It's the only one there.

http://www.putfile.com/rcannella


I know this isn't exactly an alternate engine, but I also know there are some very intelligent people on this site. I was looking for opinions on the technology. We've seen and heard about things that turn into vapor(no pun intended) under scrutiny. What?s the consensus here?

Thanks
Ric

Short answer - scam. Long answer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HHO :)

Nothing new
 

Cracking water into hydrogen and oxygen is done in junior high chemistry, no big deal. Hydrogen torches do indeed get extremely hot, but the energy needed to separate the hydrogen and oxygen from water takes, guess what, more energy than you will recover! Surprise, no free lunch. So, for hydrogen to make sense as a fuel source for things like cars, we probably need to build more nuclear plants. No sense in burning natural gas to produce electricity, which is shipped to your house, which you then use to crack water, which you then put in your car. Overall efficiency quite crappy. People in big cities like LA like the idea because it moves their pollution problem somewhere else.

Duh....should have look there myself. Guess I'm just hoping too much to get out from under these high dollar :eek: gas prices.


Thanks
Ric

I have no words of wisdom
 

When it hurts in the pocket book all of us start looking for ways to do things differently, if not more efficiently. I do not have any great insight or wisdom that would be unique. My idea is that if I can decrease my personal dependance on others to supply my needs whenever possible I will be better off financially. As a result of this concept, I grow a garden every year, I cut my own firewood to supply heat in the winter for my home, do as much of my own vehicle maintenance as possible, do my own household repairs, build my workshop, work benches and other shop equipement, and most importantly, build my own airplane.

Now, none of these by themselves will allow me to become self sufficient or keep me from paying high prices for fuel, but they all do add up to help reduce my overall expenses that I would normally outlay if I did not do any of them. I do not imagine to be getting rich by the savings nor do I feel any less pain when I have to fill up my car. However, I do feel that I am doing what I can to contribute in some ways to providing for my own needs.

If you are interested in saving money on the purchase of fuel and in finding some means to wean yourself off of paying high prices to the gasoline gods you could consider making your own ethanol. Those people (farmers, ranchers, etc.) with the raw material resources available could easily supply their own fuel. There is an outfit in Tennessee (I have no affiliation with them at all, I just noticed their advertisement on paulharvey.com ) that say they can provide equipment for individuals to produce their own ethanol (leave it to a bunch of folks from Tennessee to provide the country with a supply of home stills :p). I have been interested in exploring this myself. Who knows, perhaps I may be able to make my own fuel from the grass clippings on my 3 acre yard I have to mow. Or, better yet, I will just plow up my yard and plant a bunch of corn instead!

Hic! . . . Oh, I suppose I might end up with a slight hitch in my "git along" if I were to build a still. . . Hic! :D

This is the best still for making your own ethanol fuel:

http://running_on_alcohol.tripod.com/

It was designed from the ground up to produce fuel rather than hooch.
Looks easy enough to build.. The fun part will be finding feedstock
for it, but here in Cali, there's plenty of waste wine to be had.
Put it this way: If you can get beer or win for 30 cents a gallon,
you just won the 100LL alternative game. (based on a 10:1 ratio
of fermented feedstock to high-test ethanol).

The other fun part is getting a "small fuels producer" permit from
the BATF. Helps keep the combat droids from kicking down your
door at 4am. But it's easy, all you have to do is fill out a form
and you're good to go. The requirements aren't as onerous as
they are for a beverage distiller or an industrial alcohol producer.

The whole alternative energy problem is very simple to me.

The production of gasoline results in a net gain of energy. The production process creates many, many products -- gasoline, diesel, kerosene, petro chemicals, etc. You get more out of it than you put into the production of it.

The same goes for things like coal. You simply burn it -- there isn't a complicated process of generating the coal.

Ethanol as a fuel yields a net loss of energy. It takes more energy to make it than you get from it -- and that's not counting the energy of the sun from growing the corn or suger cane. Ethanol production doesn't really create energy, it's basically storing electrical energy (needed to brew it) in alchohol form. Compounding this fact is the seldom-stated fact that internal combustion engines require about 20-25% more ethanol per volume than gasoline, further depreciating it's viability as an alternative fuel.

Same deal with electrolysis. Electrolysis requires a *lot* of energy to break down the water molecules. If it didn't, we would have solved the world's energy problems a long time ago using the world's oceans. Interestingly, this is one of the major problems with hydrogen fuel cells in vehicles. Harvesting the hydrogen often takes a lot of energy.

We need to find alternatives to gasoline, but we need to do it with a basic knowledge of the problems involved.

With the exception of nuclear, most energy we have available
to us is essentially solar.. Including gasoline and coal.. fossilized
plants and animals become fossil fuels. The sun's energy
is responsible for their existence, as well as the geological action needed
to produce the current form. The fact that there's a 60-million-year
disconnect between them dying and us burning them makes fossil fuel
essentially an interest-free loan issued 60 million years ago.

The last part of this is true, but the first part isn't true anymore. For one
thing, corn is one of the least efficient feedstocks you can use. You only
hear about it because there are very large corn-growing interests pushing
it as a viable alternative fuel. The USA doesn't have a sugar cane industry
like Brazil does, which is too bad because sugar cane yields a lot more
ethanol than corn. Advances in technology, use of less fertilizer and
energy/fuel during the farming process have all contributed to give
ethanol a net energy gain, even from corn.

According to USDA Economic Research Service Report #814 ,
published in July of 2002, ethanol has an energy ratio of 1.34.
So you get a net gain of 34%.

The most inspiring work in making ethanol viable seems to come from
Iogen. They've invented a process to produce ethanol
from cellulose material, the fibrous part of the plant, like stalks,
husks, etc. To the rest of us, that means lawn clippings and leaves.
This uses genetically modified organisms to make glucose from
cellulose, which can then be fermented and distilled.

Can't really argue with the BTU per gallon. The solution to that is
25% more fuel capacity or 25% less range. Eventually (hopefully
within our lifetimes) we'll see aircraft designed around the specifics
of ethanol or biojet/biodiesel.


Absolutely. Efficient electrolysis will only come from nuclear power,
and that didn't turn out so good last time around. The new designs are
safer and more efficient than the classic fission pile, but the cultural
and political opposition to the pursuit of nuclear energy is nearly
insurmountable.

Wow John:

How dare you state facts and reference studies! This is about emotions!

All kidding aside, I stand corrected on the ethanol power yield thing. Guess I'm going on old information. If the ethanol producers can use ethanol to power their own plants they'll really be on to something.

Someone should just invent a Mr. Fusion for aircraft and I would be happy.

[if you don't know what Mr. Fusion is, you're not a child of the 80's]

With regard to the nuclear plant thing -- you're right. The politicos are opposed to it because of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, but many people aren't aware that coal burning releases much more radioactive material than nuclear plants -- namely uranium and thorium.

I know all about Mr. Fusion. Question is, will I have to modify the cowling
or the baggage compartment to fit it in the airplane.