Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars

chadx

"Forget using wind to produce hydrogen. PETA is trying to eliminate wind generation as it kills too many birds."

Strange but true. And PETA is not the only environmental group blocking wind generation. For much of 2007, a company wanted to put in a 'wind farm' here in Montana. Certain groups of "environmentalists" fought it. The company tried to compromise by reducing the number of windmills by almost half. They were still met with conflict so the fall of 2007, they pulled out and took their project to California. One of the main arguments was that the windmills didn't 'look good' and "wrecked the look of the environment". I guess a coal-fired electric plant looks better.

There are over 100 planned coal-fired electric plants on the drawing board in the United States and if other energy sources are not created, they will be built (actually, they probably will be built anyway because of the energy demands of our country's populous). If people are concerned about pollution from vehicles, they should read into the coal-fired power plants for a real wake-up call on mass-pollution.

paisan

I like the idea of hydrogen injection into a regular gas engine to improve milage. That would stretch the oil a bit further. Same with the Ethanol.

As for electric, I think Nukes are the way to go, as far as environment they are pretty clean, and we really haven't had any meltdowns at all.

-mike

chadx

"As for electric, I think Nukes are the way to go, as far as environment they are pretty clean, and we really haven't had any meltdowns at all. "

The main problem is there is not enough raw material to run that many nuclear power plants. If all the coal powerplants were somehow immediately replaced with with nuclear, the raw material would be spent in a few years. Though I did recently read about new technology that gets more energy out of the raw materials, so technology might stretch that out, but it's not a renewable resource and has a finite supply. Definitely not the ingredients of a long term solution.

paisan

I have not heard this at all. I'm in the industry and it really uses very little material to get a lot of energy. There is never a "long term" solution, however the positives out-weigh the negatives on nuclear energy.

-mike

stevedebi

"The main problem is there is not enough raw material to run that many nuclear power plants."

Ever hear of a breeder reactor? Sufficient fuel is NOT a limiting factor in nuclear power.

chadx

I guess the devil is in the details. Yes breeder reactors squeeze WAY more energy out of plutonium, which is "left over" from the using of uranium in the main reactors. The details, of my previous post, to highlight would being..."if all coal fired plants were changed over" meaning all of the entire planets energy needs were switched to nuclear. Well, nearly all, since a small percentage is non-coal fired energy. So that would be all current coal plants and more are being created every day. Over 100 in the planning and building phase in the USA and China is currently completing about 1 coal fired plant every week or two. So we are not only talking about replacing all coal fired plants in service today, but the future needs as well.

Yes, nuclear would be, and is, a great short term solution, but my other point was that there is a finite supply. We would be exchanging one finite natural resource (dead dinosaurs) for another (a mined product). I agree with the switch. It's the best non-coal choice we currently have. I was just pointing out it is not a good long term solution because of the finite supply. It is not a renewable resource like solar, wind, water turbine, etc. So regarding nuclear, maybe the "Don't worry. It will never run out" attitude isn't the best. I seem to recall when people thought we'd never run out of oil either and now we've long sinced peaked globally and are on the decline (though a lot of people don't seem to want to accept that either).

paisan

well, you just have to keep changing with the times. That's the nature of humans, we will adapt, change and use what we can, when the technology allows. If we switch to nuclear, by the time we were to run out of the raw material, there will be a "new" or better use of technology to generate the power we need.

-mike

gmowner

I came across this Ad in the latest edition of Times (or newsweek) Anybody tried using this product? Their claims are somewhat questionable and if it really works I think auto-manufacturers could have done this before. I'm wondering this is just a another product scam (or promises that's not true)

http://www.energyempire.com/hafc.html

paisan

I'm not sure about that one, but I've seen several units similar to that where you add on a tank of Distilled Water and Distilled Vinegar and they have a system that breaks it down to Hydrogen Gas and then it is fed into the air-intake system basically as a hydrogen injection to supplement your fuel, this supposedly increases mpg by 30-50% Cost is about $500 or so, I may try it on my old nissan 240sx to see how it works. Problem is that in the past the electrolysis process cost more in electricity than it provided in hydrogen. Recently with electronic breakthroughs they have been able to allow the hydrolysis process to use less electric than the hydrogen it produces so you actually get a savings. There is no storage of the hydrogen so it's supposed to be relatively safe.

-mike

coffedrunk

The fuel cell does work. The computor in your car is designed to allow only liquid into your engine instead of a vapor. Auto makers have worked with the oil industry to keep milage down. If the fuel burns completely then you don't have contaminates going into the oil so cars will last longer. The automakers and the oil company's are doing everything they can to stop this tecnology from coming out because it will hurt there profit they don't care about people or the environment link title

texases

I've read the "research", and I understand this is yet another scheme to separate me from my wallet.

texases

This is another crackpot scheme...stay away...far away....

coffedrunk

Sound like you work for the oil companies . If you really checked this out you would know that it worked. Or are you just one of those thats if it's new it can't be true people. If you read the research maybe you could understand it. Unless you have tried it and it didn't work for you. If it didn't it was installed wrong. So far they have been put on 200 different cars and all have and increase of over 50% in fuel mileage.

coffedrunk

Until you have put one one on our car and proved it didn't work you will never know I've got one on mine and it got a 85% increase in mpg.

texases

"Until you have put one one on our car and proved it didn't work you will never know"

Said the salesman..

Please provide any test results from a recognized test lab. Otherwise, this is clearly a scam. None of the text in the web site makes any engineering sense.

coffedrunk

The testing was done on a dyno the same as the auto makers use. I guess your not much of and engineer if it doesn't make any sense.

paisan

Coffedrunk, are you speaking of the systems that use electrolysis to extract low pressure hydrogen gas and inject it into the air intake?

I'm looking at one of these to test out on my 1990 240sx that has 250k miles. I figure if it blows up, then nothing lost.

-mike
Motorsports and Modifications Host

coffedrunk

The hafc that I'm talking about puts out 60-120 lpm of hho depending on if you are using one side or both sides of the cell and it only pulls 15 amps. It works along with a special covilizer that helps break the fuel molucules down so when it pass through the vaporizer that is installed in the fuel line it turns the fuel into more to a plasma form. So it will burn all of the fuel along with the hho. It also takes a specialised o2 optimizer to work with the computer. With this hafc you can lean out the fuel and with the hho being added you will have increased power along with more mpg. Also the polution is greatly reduced cars that would not pass emission test pasted after installing the hafc. These come with a money back guarantee if you don't get a 50% increase, they will return your money. Because they do work they can put that kind of warranty on it. 2xmpg.info

texases

Stop it, you're killing me - what a load of BS! hho - water? covilizer - what's that, exactly? plasma form? that's what you get on the freakin surface of the sun...I guess the automakers, who would kill for a 10% increase in mileage, are just idiots for not doing these things for a 100% increase!

jpotter747

Dr. Roger E. Billings, one of the early innovators in hydrogen has posted some new information about his fuel cell work. This could lead to some exciting technology. roger.billings website He built the first hydrogen fuel cell car in 1991.

coffedrunk

The automakers could have done this years ago but when you burn almost all of the fuel you don't have contanments going into the oil. The result would be your engine will last longer so you would keep your car longer. The automakers want you replacing your car not keeping it.

Kirstie_H

Wow, what a remarkable coincidence that we've had 3 new members in the last few days (unrelated, of course) urging us to visit the same website that has sparse information.

coffedrunk

There are 2000 dealers and distributers under them so to have more than one person is very possible. I've only posted under coffedrunk and didn't" even see the other posts. I resonded to texases comment that it was a scam. Considering the increase in mileage I'm getting I'll go for this scam any day of the week. Also the info asked for on the web site can be gotten on the internet on any number of search sites. So what we we be after with what we are asking? You are asked to sign up for a quote. If you want to see it go to the WIREC energy trade show in Washington DC at the convention center March 4-6. Booth 411 will have the technologies on display. If this was a scam I really don't think they would go to this show considering some of the top scientists from around the world will be there. 2xmpg.info

texases

If this was a scam I really don't think they would go to this show considering some of the top scientists from around the world will be there.

What better way to attract customers? No way to test anything at a show. It's simple-provide us with external test lab results, or be considered a scam.

There are 2000 dealers and distrubuters under them

Now it's clearer - it's a scam combined with multi-level marketing - genius!

coffedrunk

texases go to the show they have all the proof you'll need. But you know if you did that you couldn't keep taking the money from the oil companies that you must be being you never denied that statement to begin with. You say this is a scam thats the real scam.

larsb

HAFC = Have A Fine Chuckle !!!

boondogle

I went to this website and looked at the information,
http://water4gas.com/2books.htm?hop=br58com

I just built 2 HAFC's out of (2) 1 quart mason jars (coiled stainless steel wire and Distilled water w/ baking soda) installed them in my 99 Lincoln continentel . I was getting 21.6 mpg, according to the average mpg display. I am going to monitor the mpg for the next month to see if there is any difference.

But I think it is going to be better, because the display on the dash is now reading 27.2 mpg and climbing every time I drive the car at a constant 60-65 mpg. I am very skeptical of this, but I have to try it. It used be a steady 21.6 mpg.

I realize it takes energy to crack the hydrogen from the water (1.2 amps at 12 VDC) , and the energy comes from the battery. But the energy that is stored in the battery has to come from the gererator, which uses energy from the engine. So the energy depleted from the engine turning the alternator is producing that energy.

My question is: Why am I getting 5 more mpg (and climbing) than I was before I installed these 2 mason jars (with distilled water and baking soda that have 2 stainless steel electrodes immersed in the water). It must be magic!!

texases

"Why am I getting 5 more mpg?"

Some possibe reasons:
1-You're driving carefully, getting better mileage in spite of useless device
2-You aren't, you're just advertising
3-It's magic!

chevyfan1

I am curious what the end result is. Are you getting better mileage?
AS a heavy commuter I am looking for a way to save on my gas bill.

paisan

I plan on doing a similar hydrogen generator on my 240sx this spring. I'll keep the forum updated. Worst case it's a waste of $500.

-mike
Motorsports and Modifications Host

chevyfan1

Saw those websites selliing the information on how to make ur kit for under 100.00? Was wondering do they really work? I commute 50 miles one way to work and with the econmy the way it is right now I am thankful to have a job. I still do not want to continue at 100.00 a week for my commute. Even if it saved me 30% on fuel costs it would be worth it.

paisan

Same here, I commute about 60 miles round trip which adds up in terms of fuel costs. So anything I can get to help reduce that cost is a good thing.

-mike
Motorsports and Modifications Host

coffedrunk

Most of the hydrogen fuel cells will help increase mileage a small percentage. But most on the market don't produce enough hho on 4 cyl you need around 60 liters per hour and 8 cyl need around 120 liters per hour. The main problem is the computor will allow a small increase then it will reset to full rich. So if you don't have a o2 optimizer to work with the o2 sensor and the computor to hold the increase you will lose it again. Also you need to crack the fuel so that the hydrogen has something to attach to. go to 2xmpg.info and watch the videos.

texases

What a bunch of .... (IMHO). Borderline advertising, seems to me.

coffedrunk

texases you have been in here putting down technologies without putting up anything proving they don't work. Like I said before you sound more like some one connected to the oil companies that don't want to hurt there profit no matter how bad it hurts the average person. If these technologies are able to get out it will show how the oil and auto manufactures have been sc___ing the american people for the sake of there profits period.

texases

CD, it's simple - this stuff fails a simple 3 way test:
1. Does it contain previous scams? YES Your system (and I think you're selling this stuff, right?) has several elements (magnets, etc.) previously proven to be worthless scams.
2. Does it use meaningless mumbo-jumbo to appear legitimate? YES What is 'hho' that you keep talking about? Water? Why not say so? Of course, water's no benefit to an engine or combustion, is it?
3. Does it seem to be too good to be true? BIG YES You guys went too far, claiming doubling mileage, etc. That set off every BS meter on the planet. If it actually did this, it would be worth tens of billions of dollars to every car make on the planet, and the EPA and DOE would be beating down your door for information. You would seem to hold the keys to the world's energy crisis. Nobel Prize material, even! Any of this happening?

paisan

Well being an impartial bystander, having only done some early research, here is what I've found... In the past up til now, the electrolysis process has cost more in electrical energy than energy was gained by the HO it produced. Similar to the way we have more efficient electronics (like your cell battery that lasts for days rather than hours) they can produce HO from less amperage draw. HO injection is nothing new and shouldn't suprise anyone in terms of increasing MPG, most modern day ECUs and MAFs should be able to compensate for the HO injection into the air intake system. Concerns I would have are: long term reliability of the HO electrolysis unit, corrosion in the exhaust system due to increased H2O in the exhaust, flamability if the intake hosing from the HO unit were to pop off

-mike

texases

All good concerns. Also, nothing has changed the requirement to use energy to split water, more than you get back from burning it, so it's a net loss if done by the car's electrical system. Otherwise, we'd be talking about a perpetual motion machine here.

paisan

Well if you burn more energy to obtain the HO than energy you produce by burning the HO, your milage will not increase. However if you car's electrical system produces excess amperage then the HO generator could increase milage as any excess amperage being produced by the car is being wasted currently.

We shall see come spring if I actually go through with this on my 1990 240sx. As I said I will report back with a detailed log of milage etc.

-mike

coffedrunk

teases but your logic bees don't fly because the body is to big for there wings oh but they do fly. You are right the technology is worth billions to the auto makers and the oil industry thats what they are spending to stop this technology from being excepted. Yes and I do hope that the inventors of this technology do get the the Nobel Prize. Oh by the way the President spent 20 minutes of the hour he had privately touring the WIREC show and his energy advisors have spent the day at the companies headquarters. But have they said anything no because they don't want to find a solution to the energy problem for one reason $$$$$$$$$$

paisan

Guys, this is a car forum, not a political forum. Let's keep the discussions here in the realm of the mechanics and the auto-side of things. I don't want to see either political side arguing here about "oil companies" and "auto manufacturers" etc. I want to see science and car discussions. Thanks.

-mike

coffedrunk

Sorry paisan here is the results from testing.Can you imagine what being able to burn all the gasoline in your engine would mean to fuel savings? Here’s what our scientific testing has shown: In one test at our Research Facility, we got 9X the fuel efficiency from a gas guzzling 318 V-8 Chrysler engine. We ran a 318 V-8 Chrysler engine on a brand new state of the art dynamometer (the same testing equipment that Detroit uses) at 3,000 rpms under a 50% load for an hour. This test condition approximated an 8 cylinder van with a 318 engine, traveling up a 30 degree incline for one hour, at 65 miles per hour. Before the PICC modification, the engine used 18 pounds of fuel. At an average weight of 6.15 pounds per gallon for gasoline, that would equal 2.93 gallons of fuel. Converting that into miles per gallon, it got around 22 mpg.

The researchers then switched the fuel injection process to the PICC Modification and ran the engine under the exact same conditions for another hour. Now, the engine used only 2 pounds of fuel instead of 18 — an increase in efficiency of 9x. In other words, the vehicle traveling at 65 mph up a 30 degree incline for an hour would have obtained almost 200 mpg! When they shut off the engine, the researchers reported that it coasted on the plasma for another two minutes.
For more info go to 2xmpg.info

texases

Paisan-
Isn't this blatant advertising? Something not allowed?

PF_Flyer

It's a fine line between sharing info and self-promoting and we're getting close to it.

On the other hand, if coffeedrunk would like to set up a blog on his CarSpace page about this, that's perfectly fine. Then you can all go there and comennt on it without running into the forum rules.

texases

"if coffeedrunk would like to set up a blog on his CarSpace page about this"

That would be fine. All this falls more under "Gas saving gadgets and gizmos" anyway, nothing to do with hydrogen fuel cells.

boondogle

Ok everyone,
I put a small 1 qt mason jar w/ 2 stainless electrodes connected to the battery thru a sw.I had distilled water in it and baking soda (about 3 tablespoons). a 3/8" tube was installed between the top of the jar and a hole drilled in the plenum between the air filter and intake manifold.

After 3 full tanks of gas and normal driving, I have only had a 3 mpg increase, not the 6 that the dashboard display was indicating. I am working on my next HAFC,(hydrogen assist fuel cell) to produce 3 times the volume (cfm) of gas that the current one produces, and it will also have lye instead of baking soda. I'm hoping for better results, and will be installing a PICC on my Taurus next.

larsb

link title

“The BMW Hydrogen 7’s emissions were only a fraction of SULEV level, making it one of the lowest emitting combustion engine vehicles that have been manufactured,” said Thomas Wallner, a mechanical engineer who leads Argonne’s hydrogen vehicle testing activities. “Moreover, the car’s engine actively cleans the air. Argonne’s testing shows that the Hydrogen 7’s 12-cylinder engine actually shows emissions levels that, for certain components, are cleaner than the ambient air that comes into the car’s engine.”

It was not an easy task to measure the Hydrogen 7’s emissions. “A gross polluter is easy to measure, but the cleaner the car the harder it is to test,” said Don Hillebrand, director of Argonne’s Center for Transportation Research. “Most labs test at the SULEV level. Argonne’s vehicle testing facilities are unique in that they are ab

texases

Sorry, no fuel cells involved. BMW uses an internal combustion engine, adjusted to run on hydrogen instead of gasoline. Still a major accomplishment, because NOx can be a problem, regardless of the fuel. This begs the question: Where will we get the hydrogen (economically, that is).

p.s. - I think BMW has the right idea, IC instead of the yet-to-be-proved economic fuel cells.

larsb

Yep, you are correct- my bad.................(Sheepish grin inserted here)

There are no forums for "hydrogen cars" so I guess this was still the place for it, even with the lack of a fuel cell system.

texases

Yes, this seems to be the right place. I wish BMW would try this with a four-cylinder 1er or 3er. I'm curious if the technology translates into a car for the rest of us!