Forums | MacLife

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fusea … ID=9608700

Here's another vid.  Cool stuff..

You seem to know more about this than I do, but in the second video, they mentioned that the Aquygen powered car improved gas mileage by up to 50%.  I take this to mean mean the whole vehicle is powered entirely by gasoline and H2O (i.e. the Aquygen machine is powered by the car's electrical system), with the net result being a 50% improvement in fuel economy.

Last edited by Mr. T (2008-05-04 8:37 pm)

Mr. T wrote:

You seem to know more about this than I do, but in the second video, they mentioned that the Aquygen powered car improved gas mileage by up to 50%.  I take this to mean mean the whole vehicle is powered entirely by gasoline and H2O (i.e. the Aquygen machine is powered by the car's electrical system), with the net result being a 50% improvement in fuel economy.

This is actually a very old video, and the ins and outs are easily available all over the web.

It's probably somewhat accurate that there is a 50% improvement in gas mileage, but how does that help you when you're spending more than the 50% cost of gas to charge the batteries to power the electrolysis process?

Ah, this thing!  I remember going to an information meeting held at a hotel.  They were trying to sell their hydrogen system to transport truck fleet operators for a pittance, then raking in carbon credits at the expense of the Kyoto protocol. 

By the end of the ridiculous pseudo-science ridden powerpoint presentation, it had "new energy" wackos chomping at the bit, and anyone with formal scientific or engineering education ready to bolt.  It was hilarious to sit back and watch, as conversation at the end of the meeting degenerated into the ability of oxygen to eliminate free radicals in the body to cure cancer, perpetual motion machines, and all manner of other armchair scientist wet dreams.

The best part is, they didn't even have a working prototype to show us.  I know, I asked.  What a waste of time that was.

I too think this is a cool concept, but see the flaws being pointed out. If only we had a way to cheaply (in terms of energy input) split the H from the O in water.  Cold fusion anyone?

That is the ultimate dream - just put water in your tank, and go.  But you need something like cold fusion or an amazingly efficient solar panel to invest the energy to split up the water molecule.

Czachorski wrote:

I too think this is a cool concept, but see the flaws being pointed out. If only we had a way to cheaply (in terms of energy input) split the H from the O in water.  Cold fusion anyone?

That is the ultimate dream - just put water in your tank, and go.  But you need something like cold fusion or an amazingly efficient solar panel to invest the energy to split up the water molecule.

But, if you've managed to perfect cold fusion or have a powerful enough solar cell to run electrolysis, why not cut out the "middleman" and run the car directly from the electrical input? You always lose energy when you change it from one form to another (inefficiency lost to heat), so the fewer transitions, the simpler the engine, the better the energy efficiency.

Systems like this one are usually complex rather than simple—and not because complex makes for better science, but rather because the complexity serves as a screen behind which to deceive the audience.