http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=84561&;

Jun. 13 - Japanese company Genepax presents its eco-friendly car that runs on nothing but water.

The car has an energy generator that extracts hydrogen from water that is poured into the car's tank. The generator then releases electrons that produce electric power to run the car. Genepax, the company that invented the technology, aims to collaborate with Japanese manufacturers to mass produce it.

SOUNDBITE: Kiyoshi Hirasawa, CEO, Genepax.

See link above for video.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

The car has an energy generator that extracts hydrogen from water that is poured into the car's tank. The generator then releases electrons that produce electric power to run the car...

So where does the energy come from to split the water (H2O) into 2x H2 and O2 ?

Sounds like a 'perpetual motion' machine scam.


Or are they using HO + 'something' rather than H2O... ?

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

They're not showing their cards just yet but the link provided shows the vehicle running, along with some views of some of the units.

Google Genepax.


http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080613/153276/

New Fuel Cell System 'Generates Electricity with Only Water, Air'
Jun 13, 2008 19:30
Kouji Kariatsumari, Nikkei Electronics

Prototyped vehicle

120W fuel cell system
Internal portion of the 120W fuel cell stack
300W generation system mounted in a luggage room (left)

Genepax Co Ltd explained the technologies used in its new fuel cell system "Water Energy System (WES)," which uses water as a fuel and does not emit CO2.

The system can generate power just by supplying water and air to the fuel and air electrodes, respectively, the company said at the press conference, which took place June 12, 2008, at the Osaka Assembly Hall.

The basic power generation mechanism of the new system is similar to that of a normal fuel cell, which uses hydrogen as a fuel. According to Genepax, the main feature of the new system is that it uses the company's membrane electrode assembly (MEA), which contains a material capable of breaking down water into hydrogen and oxygen through a chemical reaction.

Though the company did not reveal the details, it "succeeded in adopting a well-known process to produce hydrogen from water to the MEA," said Hirasawa Kiyoshi, the company's president. This process is allegedly similar to the mechanism that produces hydrogen by a reaction of metal hydride and water. But compared with the existing method, the new process is expected to produce hydrogen from water for longer time, the company said.

With the new process, the cell needs only water and air, eliminating the need for a hydrogen reformer and high-pressure hydrogen tank. Moreover, the MEA requires no special catalysts, and the required amount of rare metals such as platinum is almost the same as that of existing systems, Genepax said.

Unlike the direct methanol fuel cell (DMFC), which uses methanol as a fuel, the new system does not emit CO2. In addition, it is expected to have a longer life because catalyst degradation (poisoning) caused by CO does not occur on the fuel electrode side. As it has only been slightly more than a year since the company completed the prototype, it plans to collect more data on the product life.

At the conference, Genepax unveiled a fuel cell stack with a rated output of 120W and a fuel cell system with a rated output of 300W. In the demonstration, the 120W fuel cell stack was first supplied with water by using a dry-cell battery operated pump. After power was generated, it was operated as a passive system with the pump turned off.

This time, the voltage of the fuel cell stack was 25-30V. Because the stack is composed of 40 cells connected in series, it is expected that the output per cell is 3W or higher, the voltage is about 0.5-0.7V, and the current is about 6-7A. The power density is likely to be not less than 30mW/cm2 because the reaction area of the cell is 10 x 10 cm.

Meanwhile, the 300W fuel cell system is an active system, which supplies water and air with a pump. In the demonstration, Genepax powered the TV and the lighting equipment with a lead-acid battery charged by using the system. In addition, the 300W system was mounted in the luggage room of a compact electric vehicle "Reva" manufactured by Takeoka Mini Car Products Co Ltd, and the vehicle was actually driven by the system.

Genepax initially planned to develop a 500W system, but failed to procure the materials for MEA in time and ended up in making a 300W system.

For the future, the company intends to provide 1kw-class generation systems for use in electric vehicles and houses. Instead of driving electric vehicles with this system alone, the company expects to use it as a generator to charge the secondary battery used in electric vehicles.

Although the production cost is currently about ¥2,000,000 (US$18,522), it can be reduced to ¥500,000 or lower if Genepax succeeds in mass production. The company believes that its fuel cell system can compete with residential solar cell systems if the cost can be reduced to this level.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

This looks interesting, but there must be an alternative energy input somewhere that allows high efficiency electrolysis so the engine can run.

The Browns Gas/HHO units basically use electricity from the car battery to provide water electrolysis. The Hydrogen and Oxygen, when it is split from water, is fed in to the vehicle air intake.

The 2 atoms of hydrogen, and 1 atom of oxygen, in air is fed in to the vehicle and combusts with the fuel (petrol or diesel).

The argument then goes that the flammable gases make the fuel burn better, and the owner can extract more work from the fuel. The result is the car runs better and can improve fuel consumption between 25% and 100%.

In this cast the energy comes from the conventional car fuel.

As the water powered car comes to our attention via Reuters it has more credibility then the usual claim origin.

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

I have to give credit to the person who notified me:

Thanks Micke!!!

http://www.exoticworldart.com/ufodbase/index.php?topic=5147

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

... The Browns Gas/HHO units basically use electricity from the car battery to provide water electrolysis. The Hydrogen and Oxygen, when it is split from water, is fed in to the vehicle air intake.

The 2 atoms of hydrogen, and 1 atom of oxygen, in air is fed in to the vehicle and combusts with the fuel (petrol or diesel)...

Well, that's an utter waste of time and energy...

Consider: What is it that turns the generator that charges the battery that splits the water (and wastefully gets hot) that is then fed into the engine intake...?

I think that one is an obvious scam!


Note that you can get better results by merely injecting a measured amount of (unsplit) water into the air intake... That trick is used on some aircraft to boost engine thrust.


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

This looks interesting, but there must be an alternative energy input somewhere that allows high efficiency electrolysis so the engine can run.

The Browns Gas/HHO units basically use electricity from the car battery to provide water electrolysis. The Hydrogen and Oxygen, when it is split from water, is fed in to the vehicle air intake.

The 2 atoms of hydrogen, and 1 atom of oxygen, in air is fed in to the vehicle and combusts with the fuel (petrol or diesel).

The argument then goes that the flammable gases make the fuel burn better, and the owner can extract more work from the fuel. The result is the car runs better and can improve fuel consumption between 25% and 100%.

In this cast the energy comes from the conventional car fuel.

As the water powered car comes to our attention via Reuters it has more credibility then the usual claim origin.

You are losing energy in this process.

... The Browns Gas/HHO units basically use electricity from the car battery to provide water electrolysis. The Hydrogen and Oxygen, when it is split from water, is fed in to the vehicle air intake.

The 2 atoms of hydrogen, and 1 atom of oxygen, in air is fed in to the vehicle and combusts with the fuel (petrol or diesel)...

Well, that's an utter waste of time and energy...

Consider: What is it that turns the generator that charges the battery that splits the water (and wastefully gets hot) that is then fed into the engine intake...?

I think that one is an obvious scam!


Note that you can get better results by merely injecting a measured amount of (unsplit) water into the air intake... That trick is used on some aircraft to boost engine thrust.

Yes in this case you are adding more mass to the thrust of the exhaust and therefore are getting a larger action/reaction situation which results in greater thrust for the short time that water is being added. I don't see the application to a piston driven internal combustion engine burning gasoline.




Keep searchin',
Martin

So people don't get confused,

These last few posts are referring to a post by The Curmudgeon. Not the topic or data of this threads topic.

I don't mind if any admins are eyeballing for off-topic opportunities.

;)

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

To a certain extent, as both the subject of the Reuters report and a HHO unit mentioned are water electrolysis, so the latter will NOT be off topic.

The basic difference, for the HHO unit (attached to a car and scavenging power off the engine generator) is that it can be seen to derive it's power, ultimately, from the fuel.

The Reuters report has some initial credibility as the Japanese are not renown to make false claims. But, until the energy source is understood, there is a suspicion of this being a perpetual motion machine (which does not exist).

This is the aspersion that ML1 and William cast towards the HHO/Browns Gas electrolysis unit.

I mentioned it only as a touted technology, that is said to improve fuel consumption in diesel and petrol engines.

Indeed I am skeptical on whether it meets it's claims. But, until I get a unit and test it out in reality, then I cannot fully dismiss it as BS.

At this point I am happy to comply with mrgray's request to return to the topic of the Japanese water fueled car. But, aside from the notice/link, and a few comments on it, the thread is not likely to develop much further (on or off topic).

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

Yes in this case you are adding more mass to the thrust of the exhaust and therefore are getting a larger action/reaction situation which results in greater thrust for the short time that water is being added. I don't see the application to a piston driven internal combustion engine burning gasoline.

[off topic] the water isnt for adding mass to make more thrust... its making things cooler so you can add more gas without burning a hole in the engine. This is what creates extra thrust... [/off topic]

Technically its not a perpetual motion car because it requires water and air in. (at least that's how I read it?) so there must be some other by-product of some sort to make this possible.

---

Do you Good Search for Seti@Home? http://www.goodsearch.com/?charityid=888957
Or Good Shop? http://www.goodshop.com/?charityid=888957

The Japanese Genepax water powered car uses a fuel cell type technology, which may explain why this technical approach appears to work.

This is certainly no bad claim as the is now identified as a type of fuel cell, but not needing the hydrogen to work

The price of the system is quoted as high, but with mass production it will become reasonable. Such a spread of this technology would have a profound impact on fuel use, hydrocarbon fuel price and atmospheric pollution.

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

Please go off topic as much as you like.

I don't mind at all! Communication is good!

:)

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Yes in this case you are adding more mass to the thrust of the exhaust and therefore are getting a larger action/reaction situation which results in greater thrust for the short time that water is being added. I don't see the application to a piston driven internal combustion engine burning gasoline.

[off topic] the water isnt for adding mass to make more thrust... its making things cooler so you can add more gas without burning a hole in the engine. This is what creates extra thrust... [/off topic]

Technically its not a perpetual motion car because it requires water and air in. (at least that's how I read it?) so there must be some other by-product of some sort to make this possible.

Reading the literature, it appears that the "By product" you talk about is input electricity from a battery. They made only a 300 watt unit. 1 horsepower is equal to 742 watts so this would be a .4 horsepower unit--hardly enough to move even that tiny little car at any useable speed.

It would be great if there were a membrane that could "filter" water to peel off the hydrogen which did not require any input energy. The molecular binding force in a water atom is considerable--it takes a lot of energy to break this bond between Hydrogen and Oxygen. And when you burn the hydrogen you get back less energy than you started with and even a fuel cell is far from 100% efficient.

A service would be done to all interested in this topic if someone would look into the implications of producing hydrogen peroxide or Hydrazine for use as a motor fuel from electrical energy from coal or nuclear power plants. We could make it at night when we have excess generating capacity. We could spread our capital costs over more units of production and lower everyone's electrical rates in the process.

Mr Gray --A good assignment for you

Thank you, William Rothamel,

I hope there's someone else more familiar with the jargon who can facilitate this. I am a layman, as is probably apparent.

:P

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

All I know is that you need 5 kWh to make a 1 cubic meter of hydrogen at standard temperature and pressure conditions by electrolysis. Where are you going to get it from? This is the gauntlet of the so called "hydrogen economy".
Tullio

---

Thank you tullio.

:)

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

All I know is that you need 5 kWh to make a 1 cubic meter of hydrogen at standard temperature and pressure conditions by electrolysis. Where are you going to get it from? This is the gauntlet of the so called "hydrogen economy".
Tullio

Good info Tullio.

We could get the KWH from nuclear power plants. Is it better to lug around a battery and use the electric energy directly or is it better to try to achieve better energy density by carrying the hydrogen itself? This is the most interesting decider for the future of transportation when the oil runs out -or when people get mad enough to want to switch fuels.

The other trick is : can we use the hydrogen logically in our distribution systems--will we burn it in a piston engine or will we be able to afford a fuel cell. We already have the distribution system if we can use batteries to store energy for our "Commuter Car".

I favor looking for a way to fix the hydrogen in liquid form at normal ambient temperatures such as Hydrazine or Hydrogen Peroxide. Electric motors for cars are becoming quite widespread in Hybrid Vehicles. Hydrogen cars are quite rare. My point here is that Hydrogen appears to require the greatest change from existing infra-structure.

I don't know much about these fuels except I think that they may be corrosive and possibly highly explosive in handling--maybe this idea would fit our current fuel distribution system better than pure hydrogen which would have to be compressed and/or kept at extremely low temperatures.

If Mr Gray applied his fervor to this question we could examine the pros and cons of this line of alternative fuels. These would all be futuristic ideas and require varying amounts of infra-structure change in the fuel system and in the chain from source to use in a vehicle.

All these problems were discussed in a book called "Beyond the age of waste" by Dennis Gabor, a Nobel prize winner, and Umberto Colombo, a professor of chemistry, around 1976. It was produced and edited by the "Club of Rome", a coalition of scientists and technologists under the leadership of Aurelio Peccei. Other books published were "The limits to growth" by Dennis Meadows and others, all taking a very advanced point of view in ecology. But prophets before their time are considered heretics. Now the same problems are discussed again, often by less qualified people, who don't know the laws of thermodynamics. I know this because I was a physics editor at Mondadori Publishing House, which produced the Italian edition of those books.
Tullio

---

Thanks Tullio,

If Mr Gray applied his fervor to this question we could examine the pros and cons of this line of alternative fuels. These would all be futuristic ideas and require varying amounts of infra-structure change in the fuel system and in the chain from source to use in a vehicle.

Just keeping people on their toes. Being younger I can point my finger at older people who know about these things, and wonder why they allowed this to get to this point. Same way younger people will be looking at me sometime soon.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss