HHO...has anyone dabbled with it yet?

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Apparently with ttechnology as it is today, to be able to generate the amount of energy we actually use today using this method (and with the amount of the suns energy which hits the planet) we would need twice as much land space as the earth actually has to be able to do it. Plants are far more efficient at converting the suns energy into storable power, which is veg oil or biomass, and the most efficient plant we have for doing this is elephant grass.
 
I've just been mowing our elephant grass yesterday, but we'll not be having a harvest from it till next year. Then I can start saving the planet! cough!
 
odenne said:
That'll be Carbon Monoxide Carbo-potsassiate then (CO CK)
Click to expand...

Doesn't the -ate ending suggest that oxygen is part of the chemical bond? Surley it should end with -ide?

Did you see that bit in Viz where some science student had done a research paper involving "copper nano bolts". Whenever they were referred to, the nano bolts had been shortened down to NTs and this was preceeded by the chemical name Cu!
 
Tinribs said:
Doesn't the -ate ending suggest that oxygen is part of the chemical bond? Surley it should end with -ide?

Did you see that bit in Viz where some science student had done a research paper involving "copper nano bolts". Whenever they were referred to, the nano bolts had been shortened down to NTs and this was preceeded by the chemical name Cu!
Click to expand...
I do remember, just spent 10 mins looking for the article coz it was funny but can't find the fooker!!

I think (again!) we could suggest the use of the words "copper bolt" when describing someone from the "overdrive" side - ere tinribs, between us and over time i think we're inventing a whole new language - Landyish?
 
what bollocks!

"The small amounts of nascent oxygen and hydrogen present in the air-fuel mix will cause a chain reaction that ignites all of the primary fuel molecules simultaneously."


thats called an explosion and that is the last thing you want or need in yer injun.
when yer fuel ignites it burns at a certain rate this stops sudden shocks to the piston etc and also give the piston a steady push down the bore. which give a smooth power delivery.
if you start simultaneously 'burning' yer fuel you've have what ids sometimes called detonation which int good fer yer engine.

they may have a pretty website and have a dickshunary with big wurds innit but its still bollocks
 
The amount of hydrogen gas able to be liberated by electrolysis in a vehicle is so small that the effect it might have in among the massive amount of air being inducted is close to zero, and the electrolysis is not even free! ENERGY is used doing it, and that comes from electricity, that is made by the alternator, using POWER to do it, and all that power comes from the burning of the diesel fuel. It is NOT an efficient process. You WILL use three times as much energy IN as you will get out from burning the tiny amount of hydrogen produced.

I will say it again and again ....

SNAKE OIL!!!

CharlesY
 
CharlesY said:
The amount of hydrogen gas able to be liberated by electrolysis in a vehicle is so small that the effect it might have in among the massive amount of air being inducted is close to zero, and the electrolysis is not even free! ENERGY is used doing it, and that comes from electricity, that is made by the alternator, using POWER to do it, and all that power comes from the burning of the diesel fuel. It is NOT an efficient process. You WILL use three times as much energy IN as you will get out from burning the tiny amount of hydrogen produced.

I will say it again and again ....

SNAKE OIL!!!

CharlesY
Click to expand...


Can we do some maths to prove once and for all its cod ****e?

The site states that the device produces 1.5 litres of hydrogen in 1 minute. How much power at 12v would this take? Are they lying about the amount it prduces? Is it possible to produce that from the power of your alternator?

Then assuming that it does produce 1.5 litres per min, how much hydrogen would you be adding to each fire?

Is it enough to do anything anyway?
 
well they reckon 2.5ltrs of distilled water will last for 100 operating hours so thats 60 x 100 = 6000 minutes and the process produces 1.5 ltrs of hydrogen per minute. so that's 9000litres of hydrogen from 2.5ltrs of water. given that there are 2 molecules of Hydrogen to every 1 molecule of oxygen H2O. that means that they are producing 13500litres of gasses from 2.5 ltr of water. that's a lot of fooking gas
 
Taking it a bit further if you have a 2.5 ltr diesel. getting 30mpg at a steady 60mph then you use the following amount of gas/fuel mixture

1 gallon = 4.55 litres,
30miles/4.55 = 6.6 miles per litre
60mph = 9.092 litres per hour or 0.1515litres per minute
which would mean a gas to fuel ratio of 9.9:1 or almost 10 times more gas than fuel.
 
Then take it a bit further again...

2.5 litre engine working at 3000rpm is 6000 explosions a minute, in a pot of about 600cc. That means it is using 3600 litres of air a minute (to burn, not including the exhaust cycle) so 0.1515 litres of H into 3600 litres gives 0.000041 litres of H per combustion. There's more power to be gained from eating beans, sticking a hose up your bum and pointing it out the back of the car for jet propulsion. In contrast, the energy required to get this hydrogen is comparitively massive (i think CharlesY was being very kind in the estimate which may be achieved in a lab in switzerland, possibly not in the engine compartment of an old banger!)
 
odenne said:
Then take it a bit further again...

2.5 litre engine working at 3000rpm is 6000 explosions a minute, in a pot of about 600cc. That means it is using 3600 litres of air a minute (to burn, not including the exhaust cycle) so 0.1515 litres of H into 3600 litres gives 0.000041 litres of H per combustion. There's more power to be gained from eating beans, sticking a hose up your bum and pointing it out the back of the car for jet propulsion. In contrast, the energy required to get this hydrogen is comparitively massive (i think CharlesY was being very kind in the estimate which may be achieved in a lab in switzerland, possibly not in the engine compartment of an old banger!)
Click to expand...



ffs lad yer dinrt gert explosions in yer injun, well not unless its a 1.8 gaylander
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

EmilH
Series 3 upside down fuel sender??
Replies
3
Views
215
EmilH
EmilH
Kiwi Landie
Series 3 Rebuild Series 3 Suffix B gearbox as Suffix D
Replies
8
Views
492
Kiwi Landie
Kiwi Landie
W
WAA181can anyone give an idea way my TD5 fuel gauge shows quarter tank but will not start. Added fuel and it runs with no problems thanks
Replies
10
Views
471
Brown
Brown
Kingshill-Rover
Series 3 Ignition Timing 2.6 Litre Petrol
Replies
6
Views
895
Kingshill-Rover
Kingshill-Rover
Bushcrusher
Fuel filter nutz stuck fast!
Replies
5
Views
516
Badger688
Badger688
Back
Top