Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Hidden Science & Advanced Technology

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-12-2011, 01:55 AM   #21
dreamweaver
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 10,882
Likes: 24 (13 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobster View Post
It won't be very safe that's for sure. It'll be like travelling on a bomb
You mean like travelling in cars fuelled by petrol (with much greater explosive power than hydrogen)?
__________________
Congratulations, you found the secret message. Shhh!
dreamweaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2011, 08:08 PM   #22
hho worrior
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

does'nt hydrogen kind of implode rather than explode , think it was on youtube ?
hho worrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2011, 08:14 PM   #23
neutrino
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,147
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hho worrior View Post
does'nt hydrogen kind of implode rather than explode , think it was on youtube ?
I think you're confusing Hydrogen in the sun which is being compressed by huge amounts of gravity and is thus imploding/fusing together?
neutrino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 02:43 PM   #24
hho worrior
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

yeah i know that , but there was a video on youtube where the guy produced hydrogen from one of these kits for a car , then he fed the gas into a glass containing water and detergent , the bubbles were full of hydrogen , he then lit it and he said " it dont explode it implodes " and it didnt break the glass , then theres the company that produce a welding torch run from hho , thats cool , the flame burns according to what it is burning through ,
hho worrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 03:42 PM   #25
h2pogo
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,650
Likes: 1,189 (670 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hho worrior View Post
yeah i know that , but there was a video on youtube where the guy produced hydrogen from one of these kits for a car , then he fed the gas into a glass containing water and detergent , the bubbles were full of hydrogen , he then lit it and he said " it dont explode it implodes " and it didnt break the glass , then theres the company that produce a welding torch run from hho , thats cool , the flame burns according to what it is burning through ,
It explodes things for sure..I have blown a few test cells to bits..I have heard it implodes but idint get what they were on about
Engines timing is set a degree or two after TDC to run on it.

It is great for cutting metal..it only heats up a small are round the cut which is cool.
h2pogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2011, 07:15 PM   #26
hho worrior
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

pleased someone else heard that too lol . thought i was going crazy , but i think we need more research on this subject , i think its the way forward as plug in electric cars wont work , sadly .
hho worrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2011, 10:28 PM   #27
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hho worrior View Post
but i think we need more research on this subject , i think its the way forward as plug in electric cars wont work , sadly .
Course they will.

It depends on usage.

An electric car would be perfect as a cheap, low maintenance second family car for dropping kids off, doing shopping or giving to students to get to and from local college.

Its horses for courses, one size doesn't always fit all.

I've got a 2.6E Mercedes (lpg) and I use it to travel 6 miles round trip a day to work. Whats the point of that? None.

Give me an electric car with a pitiful 50 mile range and I could use it all week on a single charge, charged up on cheap overnight electricity at the weekend. Virtually no maintenance, extremely cheap. Leave my Merc at home for when I need to do long journeys.

When my wife worked for the local council, she did a lot of daily driving, I asked how many miles a day she and others would do in the company car (it was left at work and they shared it ) She did about 50 miles a day, driving over the borough inspecting car parks etc. So why wouldn't an electric car, with 50-60 mile range, left at work which can be charged up overnight not be suitable?

There is no reason.

You just have to choose them for the application.

They won't suit everyone and they can't do it all, but they could easily replace a significant amount of cars on the road for short local trips and would work out much cheaper than a cheap petrol or diesel car due to less maintenance and fuel costs. Apart from changing batteries every few years, which may not be neccessary if a person employed a Negative Pulse Charger to recondition the batteries from time to time, direct drive electric cars only need tyres, lightbulbs and windscreen wipers to be maintained. The electric motor only has 1 moving part and that is a steel bar, not much to go wrong there.


The right tool for the right job.

I don't understand this one size must fit all thinking. Why do we need Nuclear or Wind, why can't we use all the available technologies on a small scale depending on where they are suited best, got a town with a river, use Hydro, live in Iceland use Geothermal, live on an island, use wave power. Live in the dessert, use solar. Live by Niagra Falls, use Hydro.

Why must everything be limited to one thing that does it all thats produced on massive scale. Its so inefficient and probably the cause of our downfall, not to mention the monopoly aspect.

I don't understand why people and governments think that way. It only serves centalisation of power and wealth, it does not serve humanity or the earth resources.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2011, 04:58 PM   #28
hho worrior
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

A friend of mine has a nissan leaf, at £23,000 + £3,000 for the charging point at home I would not call that cheap , + another £3k for replacement batteries when they are needed in , I think the expected life was 6 years or less, wich is exactly why we need another technology to replace what we have and hydrogen is the way , being burned in the existing engines,not as a fuel cell as that would require hydrogen to be stored in the car/van/truck/bus etc. Also with the electric as my friend said he drove it to work , as a nissan car salesman, 7miles then after leaving work drove home with the meter running down very quickly, arrived home , his wife wanted to go shopping ( locally) but guess what the car was plugged in to charge for at least 10 hours they say 8 but in reality it needs at least 10, so they were unable to go shopping , how limiting is that, all this comming from a nissan car salesman , he said they are absolutely usless , and the range drops significantly during cold weather, using lights , a legal requirement , and demisters also a legal requirement , ,, the enviromental saving is negligable as the electricity used for charging is dependant on already in place technology neuclear,coal etc etc, so no saving there,so in reality we revert back to a second car , double the insureance , as far as maintainance, come the day the electric car goes in for serviceing repair , i,d bet they dont say " oh it only needed 4 tyres and 3 wiper blades , and a bulb was out , we are being brainwashed into thinking electric cars are the way to go , electric cars have been around for a long long time , at one point in usa in the early days of motoring , there were more electric cars on the road that petrol sourced from " who killed the electric car " the car featurd was ev1 , so if they are so good they are being kept from us , in an efficient form , so i think as many others do we need hydrogen technology to replace petrolium technology , and but fast
hho worrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2011, 07:23 PM   #29
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

You obviously have a good understanding of the topic and you make some valid points. I won't go through them all one by one so as not to derail the thread further.

However, I think one of your statements is spot on

Quote:
so if they are so good they are being kept from us , in an efficient form
An interesting design from history has got to be Ferdinand Porsche's 'hybrid'

Quote:
The Lohner-Porsche Mixte Hybrid was the first hybrid vehicle developed in 1901 by Ferdinand Porsche. It was a series hybrid using wheel hub motors mounted in each wheel, and powered by electricity delivered from both batteries and a small generator.

Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche
Why is the Nissan leaf so bad? I don't know, perhaps Nissan are incompetent.

Take for instance the Toyota Rav 4 EV

Quote:
The RAV4 EV closely resembles the regular internal combustion engine (ICE) version - without a tailpipe - and has a governed top speed of 78 mph (~126 km/h) with a range of 100 to 120 miles (160 to 190 km).

Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV
Compaed to the Nissan Leaf

Quote:
The Nissan Leaf (also formatted "LEAF" as a backronym for Leading, Environmentally friendly, Affordable, Family car[3]) is a five-door hatchback electric car manufactured by Nissan and introduced in Japan and the United States in December 2010.[4][5][6] The US Environmental Protection Agency official range is 117 kilometres (73 mi),

Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Leaf
So how come Toyota could build an electric 4x4 with a 120 mile range in 1999 but Nissan can only build a standard car with a 73 mile range in 2011?



I've done a fair bit of reading on the subject and drew up my own plans to convert a car to electric relying heavily on information from this site -

Quote:
Electroautomotive

Link - http://www.electroauto.com/
Electroautomotive have built a small 2 seater car using standard lead acid technology in the 70's that has a top speed of 80mph (electronically limited) and a range of 100 miles for a cost of approx $10,000. They sell kits to convert your own car for $7,000

So why can't major manufacturer's with greater buying power and better design and research teams build a better car 30 years later?

I myself have plans to convert my classic Lotus (when I win the lottery) it will cost me about £8-10,000 and have a range of 80 miles yet Nissan can only build a car with 73 mile range for £23,000 - somethings not right.

The Renault Kangoo Electrique was reasonable effort

Quote:
The Elect'Road had a 150 km (93 mi) range using a nickel-cadmium battery pack and a liquid-cooled gasoline "range-extender" engine.

Link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elect'road
Quote:
First, let me describe the range extender. It is a small petrol engine (with catalyst) that produces approximately 10 KW electrical at a fixed number of revolutions. While this doesn't seem like a lot of power, with practice it is possible to drive the Kangoo on the 10kW output of the engine alone, minimizing the power drain on the battery.

One of the benefits of the Range Extender engine is that it can be used to supplement the Kangoo's electric heat in winter.

Link - http://evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=582
I say again, they don't suit everyone and they won't suit all requirements, but there is no reason why some of the cars on the road today could not be electric, built affordably and have a practical range.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2011, 08:30 PM   #30
hho worrior
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

I will read the articles, sound good , i like the sound of the range extender , not sure why nissan can only produce a car with such limits , only that they dont want you to totally disregard the petrol car , as it makes lots of profit for them , and oils companies, i live near a nissan factory they make the leaf , qashqai , etc, lots of my friends work there , we are the motor city of england , if only we had motown too , ,,,,, there has got to be better ways to extend the range of the electric car , better batteries, motors,lighter , so on and so on , its a subject i,m really interested in so look forward to reading the sites you have posted
hho worrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2011, 09:12 PM   #31
paloem
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

you said you would need loads of watts for hydrogen production, why not put a genorsator on the driveshaft of the car and make as much elec as you want?
__________________
after you have worked your whole life in search of a better existence you'll look back and see that the only thing that ever brought happiness was the love you found and the love you gave.

Last edited by paloem; 12-12-2011 at 09:13 PM.
paloem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-12-2011, 03:27 AM   #32
apollo_gnomon
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,392
Likes: 6 (4 Posts)
Default

An electrical generator puts load on the driving force, transferring some of the energy of the driving force into electricity and removing energy from the driving force. This is true for hydroelectric dams, steam turbines, wind turbines, OTECs, gensets and the alternator in an automobile.

Have you ever had a bicycle with one of those wheel-driven generators to run a headlight? I had one as a kid, and it puts surprisingly large load on the pedals just to run a single lightbulb.

So putting a large generator on the driveshaft of an automobile to generate more electricity puts load on the engine, consuming more gasoline. Because of the losses in efficiency with any change from one form of energy to another you'll never get enough energy to drive the engine with the output from the engine and still have energy left over to move the car down the road.

"Water-for-fuel" projects are the low-hanging fruit of mad science. You can stack a bunch of stainless steel or copper plates with insulating spacers connected to the battery of a car, dunk it in water and make flammable gas. Pretty amazing, I've done it many times myself for various lab projects.

The first electrolysis rig I built was in a glass peanut butter jar, as part of an elaborate Chemistry project for High School. I was doing the math for making nitroglycerin from scratch and needed to go back to "first principles" to find out how much hydrogen I could get in how much time. I got my numbers, but then my electrodes made contact and arced, burning the bubbles of gas on them. My brother still talks about the time I blew up a jar of water in the basement.

Most Water For Fuel (W4F) projects I've read about are installed on cars/trucks with fuel injection and an engine management computer. Feeding a stoichiometric mix of cracked water into the air stream of the intake manifold displaces a volume of air required to burn the gasoline with sufficient overage of oxygen to prevent pollution. This changes the O2 sensor readings so the computer starts hunting for proper "fuel trim" (size of pulses to give the fuel injectors). Most people change the Oxygen Sensor in some way to fool the computer.

It's pretty hit-or-miss, but the net result is they lean out the engine. This makes the MPG higher so they think they're doing something, but if you just goof around with the O2 sensor alone you'll get the same result without the electrolysis rig.

So why not just lean out the engine and save fuel? Because then the combustion runs too hot and you'll end up burning a valve. Burning water along with a leaned out condition might MIGHT cool the combustion and keep the engine from eating itself.

(The same thing is true for alcohol burning engines -- using straight 94% alcohol, the highest percentage that can be achieved with distillation, puts a small amount of water in the combustion which slows down the alcohol combustion to a more favorable rate for ordinary engines. Alcohol-fuel race cars use 100%, but are running higher RPM so the fast burn is efficient and effective. For blended fuels such as E85, the alcohol combustion is slowed by the 15% gasoline content. These fuel require 100% alcohol as 94% will not blend with gasoline.)

Another engineering challenge for burning hydrogen in a gasoline engine is Hydrogen Embrittlement. The most susceptible metals are high strength steels, such as valve stems, cams and crankshaft. Some amount of hydrogen can leak past the piston rings along with exhaust blow-by that normally gets into the crank case. Over time this could lead to wear and premature failure. An engine designed for hydrogen from the beginning would have engineering solutions to prevent damage.

In my research on W4F many times I've seen the "moving goalposts" of what people think they're achieving. The tiny amount of hydrogen and oxygen that can be created by a stack of light-switch covers in a mayonnaise jar (not mocking it; the design works just fine if built properly) powered by the vehicle's alternator will never fully power the engine. So people have convinced themselves that adding the gas creates some kind of beneficial but numerically vague improvement in the combustion.

The real problem with W4F is that you're never going to get the amount of energy out of the gas that you payed for by burning petroleum fuel. The Stanley Meyers theories about "vibrating" the water molecules apart are freely available on the internet but nobody has duplicated his alleged results. If it could be done, someone would have done it by now. In my opinion, Meyers was a fraud and a quack with half-baked (or fully "baked," it was the '70s) ideas.
apollo_gnomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-12-2011, 08:45 PM   #33
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hho worrior View Post
I will read the articles, sound good , i like the sound of the range extender ,
Cool, I hope you enjoy them!

Quote:
if only we had motown too ,
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-12-2011, 05:00 PM   #34
somethinganonymous
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,399
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alan m View Post
The amount of energy that it takes to seperate the Hydrogen from the Oxygen in a molecule of water is the same amount that you get when you recombine them, so the cost of creating Hydrogen is not enticing.
However if you use a catalyst, such as Platinum, it becomes very inexpensive to produce Hydrogen on a mass scale.
Gold will fall in value but Platinum can only go up.
Alan
Not if you separate the hydrogen atom from the oxygen in the water molecule without applying any energy the force of anti gravity will break the hydrogen bond with the oxygen and relase hydrogen gas from the water without the need to add any energy to the equation from an external source (electricity, fire, etc etc)
somethinganonymous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-12-2011, 05:52 PM   #35
truthseer
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 127
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

You can also create hydrogen in many other ways.
Thermal decomposition of hydrocarbons which gives Carbon, a useful biproduct
Or the Steam methanol process, also cheap
These methods are cheap and have enticing side products

Hydrogen also gives a log of energy per mole and liquidised hydrogen at high pressure is easy.to store
truthseer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 09:18 PM   #36
bush doctor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Not A Million Miles Away
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 6 (4 Posts)
Arrow The future of fuel is

air...



__________________
For The Wayseer Family
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPR3GlpQQJA:)
bush doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2012, 02:05 AM   #37
ownoiz
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,310
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Internal combustion engines can run on Hydrogen, in the same way they can run on Compressed Liquid Gas (known as LPG or propane/butane)

But to create the Hydrogen entirely on board, from water, and power the engine with no fuel, i dont think so.

But if a double wall tank is fitted to a vehicle and it is filled at a filling point with compressed liquid Hydrogen , i believe that can work if it is metered to the engine correctly.

BMW had a car like this over 10 yrs ago, though i cant find any info now, its been erased.

It was an old e32 750iL if i recall correctly, with its original v12 5.0 engine...apparently with little engine modifications other than removal of catalytic converters and of course the metering system to give the engine the correct amount of gas.

It kinda makes sense that if engines run on LPG, they could run on other flammable gases.

But imho anyone claiming to run a car entirely from water is BS.

Better to put effort into lighter car, lighter wheels and brakes, lighter more efficient engine parts and correct tune rather than magic beans.

or make your own electric car with batteries, as pi3141 said, they have a limited range, but can be made using car batteries.

Not the manufacturers electric scams where the car is 30K USd and the short life batteries are 5k USD, you wont win getting one of them.
.

Last edited by ownoiz; 12-01-2012 at 02:11 AM.
ownoiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2012, 02:24 AM   #38
ownoiz
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,310
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hho worrior View Post
this hho thinking must be viable , submarines use the same process to replenish the air inside , separating hydrogen and oxygen from water , it was on how its done , a uk tv programe , however maybe we are some way off from using an on demand system , it needs research from scientists instead of being poo pooed , just a thought , there must be hundreds of ways to fuel a car, not battery though , far to limited and expensive to be taken seriously , oh i,m new on here so hello ,
While subs may use this to replenish the air...

Subs are nuclear or diesel-electric dude.

You just cant gain net energy (not in anyway that is declassified )

You will find that either diesel powered electric gensets or Uranium (lol) would be being used to give it the juice.
.
ownoiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2012, 02:26 AM   #39
ownoiz
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,310
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Making and storing hydrogen with solar power and water...


Direct Link: .
ownoiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2012, 02:43 AM   #40
apollo_gnomon
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,392
Likes: 6 (4 Posts)
Default

Compressed air is NOT fuel, but only a method of storing energy. The energy to compress the air comes from, what, burning coal? Natural gas? Uranium? Chinese-made photovoltaic panels?

I've run into videos about the MDI cars before. The platforms they've designed are cute, and using compressed air for motive power makes for a clean quiet device: perfect for crowded urban areas. But like hydrogen or LPG cars you need to have an infrastructure in place to recharge them away from home. The pressure in the tanks is over 2 x the pressure available from the ordinary fuel station tire filling hose or home air compressor.

Here's the English language site for MDI:
http://www.mdi.lu/english/index.php
apollo_gnomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:06 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.