run gas engines on water question

[planedick]

Easy step

I just did some preliminary experimentation and found that making HHO is pretty easy in small quantities. Seems that larger volts as opposed to larger amps generates the most HHO. I am not so sure about being able to produce enough on the XS11 to make a real difference because of space requirements and voltages needed. Even if I could produce enough to help, the question is how to manage it and make the changes in mixture to run right.

[The Lorax]

I have considered trying to set it up on my 11 also providing it actually does some good on my truck. I figure one could plumb it into the vacuum port on the intake boots, my main concern would also be jetting , placement, and available electron flow...don't really want to add too much load to this charging system, I mean my truck has a 100 amp alternator on it, I figure its got some to spare but as charging systems go, the XS is not really leading the pack if you know what I mean. have a nice day and ride safe.

[HobbyMan]

electrolysis is a very inefficient way to make hydrogen gas. It uses way too much electricity for the results. Also, what you don't tell you most of the time is that the anodes and cathodes are somewhat sacrificial. You have to continually maintain them. One way that has worked very well on an experimental level (go cart) is using NaOH(sodium hydroxide) which can be found easily and aluminum (soda cans). My buddy back home built a hydrogen generator (pvc chamber). Mix up the sodium hydroxide and crushed soda cans and you have PLENTY of hydrogen. Just plumb that out of your h2 generator into your intake manifold and you are running on hydrogen. I don't know that much about chemistry but the results of these experiments were pretty cool. When you need more fuel, stop for lunch and drink a few sodas.
hydrogen generator
hydrogen gocart
That would be my gocart in the background
This guy knows more about chemistry than I will ever know in a lifetime

[Crazcnuk]

'Too much' electricity only applies if the price is high. No one really cares how much it takes to produce a given volume of hydrogen, except for the cost.

This is why we HAVE to look at nuclear power generation. It is the only source we have that can take advantages of economies of scale and produce huge amounts of electricity from relatively small input of fuel.

Somewhere down the road someone will make a sustainable fusion reaction and all this will be moot as we will be able to produce all the electricity we could ever dream of, at a very low cost. We have to get over the nuclear fear, first, though.

As for Bio-diesel, propane, Butane, and any other hydro-carbon fuel, they are a waste of time. They may be cheap, for a while, but they are still HYDROCARBONS, which we need to get away from

We can't just make a slightly cleaner fuel, we have to get away form those fuels all together, and hydrogen is THE fuel that has
any hope of being the replacment.

Hydrogen has no carbon, sulfur, lead, nitrogen, or any other pollutant in it, and is a great way to clean water.

My other issue with bio diesel is it takes FOOD. Until we have no starvation, I feel using food for fuel is just selfish. The entire agricultural economy of the US is already taking a major hit as the cost of corn goes through the roof.

[The Lorax]

I saw a documentary on the science channel about nuclear fusion, some guy in France actually was able to get a fusion reaction started without using a radioactive component. it was really cool, they used some kind of electro-magnetic field to contain the "reaction" but it was really cool, used electro - shock to get hydrogen to fuse. they still appear to be half a century or so from perfecting the process, but when it's finished, it will be pretty cool. it's not really "cold fusion" but it seems to have the same promise while actually being attainable. have a nice day and ride safe.

[Dragon Tamer]

Keep in mind folks that we are ALL burning hydrogen as we speak, it is basically the only flammable part of any HYDROcarbon fuel. Burning pure hydrogen will NOT give you perfect combustion with NO pollutants unless you are using pure oxygen for the oxidizer and have completely sealed the engine lubes from the combustion process. This because air is only composed of about 20% oxygen, 75% nitrogen and 5% CO2 along with trace amounts of other gases, so you get a LOT of NOS and carbon output. Not as much as with hydrocarbon fuels but it is still there. Still in all it is a fascinating idea. The big problem as Lorax has stated is getting enough of it without expending too much for the energy needed.
Lorax, when you get it up and running make sure to keep the video camera going, I didn't and only have the pictures of what is left of the equipment. DRAT, and I just love a nice explosion! You have to remember that when you are producing hydrogen from water, you are also producing oxygen and it does not take much to mix the two back together, any form of ignition will do nicely. Then you get what the military guys call a "fuel vapor explosive device", briefly a lot of fun but it takes far too long to grow your mustache and eyebrows back. DAHIK!!!!!!!!!!

[The Lorax]

I will definitely have a camera rolling, I may even have to open a you - tube account when I'm done. I'm thinking that if it goes boom, it will be great fun to watch I almost have my prototype finished, just some plumbing, wiring, mixing up to components and seal it all up. I figure the worst case scenario is I end up with a large crater in the sidewalk in front of my house, depending on my neighbors, I suppose I might have some constable type issues to deal with but by and large my neighbor actually like me...for now. have a nice day and ride safe.

[fredintoon]

A certain degree of separation

"You have to remember that when you are producing hydrogen from water, you are also producing oxygen and it does not take much to mix the two back together, any form of ignition will do nicely. "
Hi Dragon,
on Googling "Brown's gas" one of the devices I found was built as a U-tube with a long base leg with an electrode at each end. Hydrogen came off at one electrode and Oxygen at the other and the two gases bubbled up into separate pipes. You didn't build that one, eh?

[xschop]

sacraficial anode

I will be using Stainless Steel for everything. The negative side will oxidize first (copper is not good here)

[Crazcnuk]

"Burning pure hydrogen will NOT give you perfect combustion with NO pollutants unless you are using pure oxygen for the oxidizer and have completely sealed the engine lubes from the combustion process."

Of course, but then the pollutants are not attributable to the fuel.

And since those pollutants are already present in the atmosphere, the hydrogen is not ADDING to the pollution, although it may help to recombine some of the (pollutants?) elements already present into other things.

[HobbyMan]

Back when I used to use electrolosys, I used carbon rods My buddy still uses certain carbon welding rods that work well. Your water is going to get dirty.

[Dragon Tamer]

Hi Fred,
Nope, didn't build that one, used my own design, gases stay seperate unless you let the water get low, OOPS. Too bad I had gone uptown for a few minutes, missed a dandy boom!

Crazcnuk,
ALL combustion using plain air will contribute to pollution as mixing nitrogen with other combustion products will give you many types of oxides of nitrogen directly related to the fuel. There are probably less carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide outputs with pure hydrogen but there will still be some sort of pollution. The point is that there is nowhere near as much as the bunny huggers would have us believe. A case in point is a recent report that the average lawnmower puts out as much as 600 pounds of pollution a year! Really! What is average? My sons lawn is about the size of a tennis court and mine is a little over four acres but even with my lawn I don't use 600 lbs of fuel a year, so how can I be putting out 600 lbs of pollution?? If one takes the report as true the average lawn has to be a little larger than an 18 hole golf course! The point of this all is that until we can get a nuclear reactor that will fit in the XS bikes (not that I am sure that there is not one hiding in there already) and a safe way of getting rid of the spent fuel we are stuck with what we got. When Mount Pinetubo blew up it sent more chlorine, sulphur, carbon dioxide and nitrogen gases into the air in the first three hours of the eruption than man has ever built (and don't try and blame that one on me as I was not even born when it happened) so I will not worry too much about my lawn mower or motorcycle.

[Ken Talbot]

Originally posted by Dragon Tamer
I don't use 600 lbs of fuel a year, so how can I be putting out 600 lbs of pollution

Pilfered from www.fueleconomy.gov

"It seems impossible that a gallon of gasoline, which weighs about 6.3 pounds, could produce 20 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) when burned. However, most of the weight of the CO2 doesn't come from the gasoline itself, but the oxygen in the air.

When gasoline burns, the carbon and hydrogen separate. The hydrogen combines with oxygen to form water (H2O), and carbon combines with oxygen to form carbon dioxide (CO2).

A carbon atom has a weight of 12, and each oxygen atom has a weight of 16, giving each single molecule of CO2 an atomic weight of 44 (12 from carbon and 32 from oxygen).

Therefore, to calculate the amount of CO2 produced from a gallon of gasoline, the weight of the carbon in the gasoline is multiplied by 44/12 or 3.7.

Since gasoline is about 87% carbon and 13% hydrogen by weight, the carbon in a gallon of gasoline weighs 5.5 pounds (6.3 lbs. x .87).

We can then multiply the weight of the carbon (5.5 pounds) by 3.7, which equals 20 pounds of CO2! "

Would you burn 30 gallons of gas over a summer?

[Crazcnuk]

All that being what it is, when you burn hydrogen, the binary atom H2 combines with Oxygen O to produce water H2O.

Period. What the other pollutants, in the air, do, is not a function of the hydrogen process.

One hopes that the amounts in the air are trace in comparison to the crap that is in the present hydrocarbon fuels that are made specifically from these pollutants, ie; Carbon, Sulfur, Nitrogen, etc.

This issue with hydrocarbon fuels is what those pollutants do with other pollutants in the air to produce yet other nasty combinations.

THe overall point, which was made earlier, is that everything we burn contains hydrogen. The issue is how much garbage is in the fuel we are using at any one time. If we are going to burn hydrogen, should we not use the cleanest form available?

[SFerinTEXAS]

Look here http://www.smacksboosters.110mb.com/ They give all up.and http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter10.pdf