The process MIGHT be possible, depending on the efficiency of the engine, the generator, and the Cell. The excess heat is caused by too much voltage across the cell. 1.24 volts is all that is supposed to be required to cause water electrolysis to occur. You can hook up cells in series to drop the voltage, or add neutral electrodes, between the positive and negative. You can also adjust the electrolyte in the water. You can also use a PWM.

What were you using as an electrolyte? Sodium Hydroxide or Potassium Hydroxide are supposed to be the best. Baking Soda gives off too much CO and CO2, and coats the electrodes with Carbon. Salt gives off Chlorine gas.

Mark

Hi Mark.

I used Sulphuric Acid, H2SO4, as the electrolyte.

From the little I remember from my schooling it is not the voltage that causes the heat, but the current. Putting two units in series will drop the voltage to 6v to both, but will increase the overall current draw on the supply. But I suspect that was another lesson that I wasn't paying enough attention to!

I think that NaOH or KOH is probably a better electrolyte agent to use. From what I have read, a teaspoon of it in a gallon of distilled water is about all that is required.

---

You are technically correct that the water is not being used as a fuel. It is just a safe way of carrying a dangerous mix of chemicals (H2 and O2 mixed are very explosive) that have a higher energy content than any petroleum based product that we currently use.

It's worse than that in terms of energy. You must put in MORE energy in splitting the water into H2 and O2 gas than you can ever hope to retrieve by letting the H2 and O2 gasses reconbine to give you the same water oncemore.

Hence all the ongoing research into materials that absorb (or adsorb) H2 gas at low pressures so that you can have a useful low pressure H2 gas tank.

There's lots of O2 in the atmosphere "for free".

(And also too much CO2 and CH4 generated by Man's industrial scale activities!)

I agree completely about minimising losses, and am going to start experimenting again. There are a lot more uses for Hydrogen from water than as a supplemental fuel for motor vehicles which are very inefficient.

Good stuff, but I think you'll get far more mileage out of home-brew biodiesel or ethanol or perhaps even better, butinol. Or if you're on a farm, collect the methane from your livestock waste. Anaeorobic decomposition even...

It may be possible to mix several technologies like solar power with Hydrogen generation to heat our homes. Solar water heaters are already used to reduce heating costs. Electrical Solar generators used in combination with domestic electrical supply to produce Hydrogen might be cheaper than using current fuel based heaters if hydrogen generation can be made efficient enough.

We certainly need to use various ideas in parallel.

Solar heaters seem to give the best results. Solar electric only look plausible near the equator, far too inefficient and expensive still.

The only good hydrogen generators that I've seen are to use biology or to decompose oil.

If the oil is decomposed at the oil well, then you can reinject the liberated CO2 back into the well to trap it down there... So far, politics and commercial greed appear to have stifled that one.

It is definitely worth continuing to investigate. I for one am extremely unhappy with the way that fuel costs are risning.

Myself also, for various reasons.

The quickest and most immediate thing you can do is to reduce your fuel use in the first place. Unfortunately, that usually means changing long held old habits... Or just being more thoughtful in the first place...


Good luck,
Martin

If adding a HHO generator will reduce my fuel usage, by making the combustion more complete, causing less emissions, it will save money and help the environment.

The initial cost isn't much, compared to the possible savings. IF it works. I have built a couple of really small generators, and they do put out the gas. Getting the wattage use down, without losing HHO production rates is something I am going to experiment with.

---

If adding a HHO generator will reduce my fuel usage, by making the combustion more complete, causing less emissions, it will save money and help the environment.

The initial cost isn't much, compared to the possible savings. IF it works. I have built a couple of really small generators, and they do put out the gas.

I've just done a quick Google and OMG! Absolutely stunningly unbelievable!!

"Water" is a miracle 'fuel' that you can drive on for miles and miles! - Just add 20 Amps... Yes???...

Phew!

Jazz it up with a few obscure names for what is still water, hydrogen and oxygen and make your (scam) millions!


OK, so don't believe me? See:

"Is the whole HHO thing a scam?"

The latest “scientific breakthrough” scam — water gas (14 July 2006)

The proof that HHO is a scam


Sorry, I'd not realised just how much scam junk there is on the "HHO" silliness on the web. I guess avoid the more correct descriptions of H2O, H2 and O2 and you can claim any old hokum you like...

Getting the wattage use down, without losing HHO production rates is something I am going to experiment with.

That makes for an interesting experiment for you to confirm the hard numbers for yourself.


However, you'd get a lot more mileage by driving more slowly and gently, reducing the weight of your rig, streamlining it, and putting in a smaller turbo-charged engine whereby the turbo is only used only when needed for extra power.

Or convert to biodiesel, or other bio-fuels, but only if produced from waste crop material.


Good luck,

Cheers,
Martin

---

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

MythBusters just repeated their "Alternate Carborater" show yesterday. And the "HHO solution" they tried to use was, according to their reading of the instructions, supposed to produce the only fuel needed. No Gas/diesel required. So of course their tests failed to even start the engine. :-)

I really think it would be nice to have them do a real HHO solution comparison.

They also mentioned that the EPA is "really interested in increased mileage claims" and performed tests on a large number of said claims. Supposedly, even the best performance improvements the EPA has managed to test out only amount to approximately 6% improvements. But 6% is better than nothing, right?

...Supposedly, even the best performance improvements the EPA has managed to test out only amount to approximately 6% improvements.

What is that one for? (What 'improvement' technique/device?)

Here's a few details for saving up to 30% depending on conditions:

Save money on petrol [and diesel :-P ] with fuel-efficient driving


Cheers,
Martin

---

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

...Supposedly, even the best performance improvements the EPA has managed to test out only amount to approximately 6% improvements.

What is that one for? (What 'improvement' technique/device?)

Here's a few details for saving up to 30% depending on conditions:

Save money on petrol [and diesel :-P ] with fuel-efficient driving


Cheers,
Martin

They didn't mention it during the show. It was just part of the "conversation" after their tests regarding whether the suggested myth was "Busted" or not.

The pinging/preignition that most vehicles experience is due to just a couple of factors. The most common one (again, from what I have read), on vehicles using HHO, is that the air fuel mixture is too lean. The users try to get too much out of too little H. I plan on keeping enough Diesel running through the system to keep it lubricated. There are Propane injection systems readily available, but they are mostly used for hot-rodding. I am looking for economy.


Mark

If we're talking about Diesels, their basic mode of operation is the same one that causes pinging/preignition in the standard internal combustion engine.

When you compress the fuel/air mixture, it gets hot, and as it gets hot, if you have a combustible mixture at that temperature, it burns.

The conventional way of keeping things from overheating is to introduce a little bit of excess fuel and let it carry off the heat. Alternately (though less popular) is to introduce a little bit too little, which prevents the combustion from reaching as high a temperature.

The big change on a diesel is that you compress air (without fuel), achieve the high temperature, and then introduce the fuel, which ignites.

If you use a fumigant (propane, hydrogen, whatever) you aren't compressing air, you are compressing a fuel/air mixture -- and you run the risk of preignition.

I didn't say it was impossible. I am simply pointing out that it is not without risk.

If you break it, you own both parts.

---

OMD! I remember having a big (though fun) argument about this with MrGray about a year ago.

Basic Rules of our Universe: you can’t get anything for free: somewhere, somehow, the balance is kept. Driving a car will always require more energy “in” that productivity “out“.

WARNING Some math content but, please, read this article:

Entropy

So, short version: Cracking water to get hydrogen and oxygen to burn in the engine, while technically possible, will never produce more energy (nor even the same amount of energy) as is expended in cracking the water in the first place.

All of these schemes are handy at separating gullible investors from their money, but otherwise are fools gold.

Here is the proof in the pudding: Will these folks allow MIT or UBC (or for that matter, Berkeley) to take possession of one of their vehicles and technologies for a thorough and independent breakdown? My guess: NOT.

btw: it is good to be back. ;)

---

Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

The pinging/preignition that most vehicles experience is due to just a couple of factors. The most common one (again, from what I have read), on vehicles using HHO, is that the air fuel mixture is too lean. The users try to get too much out of too little H. I plan on keeping enough Diesel running through the system to keep it lubricated. There are Propane injection systems readily available, but they are mostly used for hot-rodding. I am looking for economy.


Mark

If we're talking about Diesels, their basic mode of operation is the same one that causes pinging/preignition in the standard internal combustion engine.

When you compress the fuel/air mixture, it gets hot, and as it gets hot, if you have a combustible mixture at that temperature, it burns.

The conventional way of keeping things from overheating is to introduce a little bit of excess fuel and let it carry off the heat. Alternately (though less popular) is to introduce a little bit too little, which prevents the combustion from reaching as high a temperature.

The big change on a diesel is that you compress air (without fuel), achieve the high temperature, and then introduce the fuel, which ignites.

If you use a fumigant (propane, hydrogen, whatever) you aren't compressing air, you are compressing a fuel/air mixture -- and you run the risk of preignition.

I didn't say it was impossible. I am simply pointing out that it is not without risk.

If you break it, you own both parts.

I want to keep it in one piece.......

There are regular water injection systems, and propane injection systems, which are used on diesel engines. If I can use Hydrogen, and if it turns out to be non-detrimental to the engine, and IF it ends up working to improve mileage, then it will be a win-win situation. Lots of IF's but I am willing to try just about anything at this point.

Paying over $300 to fill up my personal/work pickup is just outrageous.

---

I believe that water injection systems --like the "Fish" carburetor and the "Turbinator " insert for gasoline engines have all proven to be scams with all claims unfounded. Can you use a smaller 4 cylinder gas powered pickup that might get 25 MPG on the highway or do you really need the hauling and pulling capacity of your "Big Diesel Truck" ?

If you use it in your work you can obviously take credit for the cost of operation at Tax Time. Can you leave the diesel at the job site and commute on a motorcycle ?

OMD! I remember having a big (though fun) argument about this with MrGray about a year ago.

Basic Rules of our Universe: you can’t get anything for free: somewhere, somehow, the balance is kept. Driving a car will always require more energy “in” that productivity “out“.

WARNING Some math content but, please, read this article:

Entropy

So, short version: Cracking water to get hydrogen and oxygen to burn in the engine, while technically possible, will never produce more energy (nor even the same amount of energy) as is expended in cracking the water in the first place.

All of these schemes are handy at separating gullible investors from their money, but otherwise are fools gold.

Here is the proof in the pudding: Will these folks allow MIT or UBC (or for that matter, Berkeley) to take possession of one of their vehicles and technologies for a thorough and independent breakdown? My guess: NOT.

btw: it is good to be back. ;)

Welcome back!

Ok, so who is going to get rich off of me this time? I have paid for nothing other than a bit of stainless steel plating. There are hundreds of plans available for free on the internet. I am not going to use any of them per se. I plan on making my own. You can buy it on eBay for $49.95... LOL... NOT!

Not trying to get something for nothing. Not trying to run the vehicle on Hydrogen/Oxygen alone.

How many watts does a 100, 200, 500 or 900 watt stereo amplifier use? 100, 200, 500 or 900 watts! Does it improve anyone's fuel mileage? NO! But people still use them. If one of these generators uses 400 Watts, and IF the resulting Diesel/Air/(HHO/Hydroxy/H2O2/etc.) fuel mixture provides a more efficient burn, why not? The alternator on my pickup is big enough to provide the necessary amperage without being detrimental to the electrical system. If that isn't enough, I have plenty of room to add some additional batteries for it to draw its power from. I have a new technology called a battery charger, that can be plugged in, overnight if need be. LOL. If power consumption is the only real issue, that is easily solved.

IF adding some kind of fuel treatment, octane booster, acetone, mothballs or whatever, to gas or diesel, gives better economy, why not use it? Why buy higher octane gasoline?

IF I get it set up, (and I am NOT paying some scam artist for plans and designs),and IF it gives improved efficiency of combustion, I will be willing to show it to anyone that wants to see proof.

Granted, there are lots of IF's in that statement.

People put Propane add-on systems on their Diesel motors every day. If somehow adding more fuel to the fire helps them run better, (the propane systems I have seen are all for high performance), why wont adding Hydrogen to the mix help? Some say that burning the hydrogen/oxygen mixture along with the normal fuel mixture, will do nothing for the normal combustion. Even if the it does not actually combine and combust at the same time, along with the Diesel/air mixture, it should improve the process by adding H2O into the combustion chamber, just as water injection systems do. Personally I remain HOPEFUL that it will improve my mileage. If it does, happy me. If it does not, then I am not being scammed by anyone. If buying a cylinder of Hydrogen from the local welding shop, and injecting pure Hydrogen into the mixture that way helps efficiency, why wont generating the Hydrogen in the vehicle work?

What about California's Hydrogen Highway? There are Internal Combustion Engine vehicles that DO run on Hydrogen alone. But they have to have specialized, high pressure, crashproof cylinders for Hydrogen storage.

If it helps at all, it will be an improvement. If it helps at all, we have 4 farm tractors, several farm trucks, and several personal vehicles that will get boosters.

If it does not help at all, I will admit it. What is the harm in trying?

Have YOU tried it? No? Then how do you know it will not work? At least I am willing to TRY it.

Maybe it wont work, maybe it will. Personally, I want some proof, one way or the other.

There are lots of people, that are unwilling to let go of their preconceived ideas about this technology, due to the fact that there have been so many scams involved with it.

---

I believe that water injection systems --like the "Fish" carburetor and the "Turbinator " insert for gasoline engines have all proven to be scams with all claims unfounded. Can you use a smaller 4 cylinder gas powered pickup that might get 25 MPG on the highway or do you really need the hauling and pulling capacity of your "Big Diesel Truck" ?

If you use it in your work you can obviously take credit for the cost of operation at Tax Time. Can you leave the diesel at the job site and commute on a motorcycle ?

The water injection systems I have read about, as well as the propane injection systems, were generally for high performance applications, not for mileage. I have not used either.

As far as using a smaller vehicle, not really an option. I dont really commute, as I live at work when I am working. The only driving I do when at work, is the 100 mile each way trip to town for groceries about once a week. Getting a 2nd vehicle to location, would require either towing it to location, or having a 3rd vehicle come out to give the driver of the 2nd vehicle a ride home. That would have to happen at the beginning, and at the end of each job. Not really an option.

When at home, on the farm, I am always hauling something. Whether it be 15 tons of hay on a flatbed trailer, a 5th wheel horsetrailer full of pigs, sheep, cattle, horses, or whatever. Always using the truck to its full potential. It is difficult to drive "economically" in the conditions I am normally driving in. Some piece of equipment, at work or at home is always in need of repair. Swapping tools from one vehicle to another all the time would also be a major pain.

Also, in this testosterone laden oilfield, as a "boss", I have to have a bigger and better truck than my subordinates......... Intimidation factor.

All good ideas, but they don't really work for me. If there was an "easy" solution.....

---

Sniper

You carry on with your HHO development - developing, optimising (for hydrogen gas output), fitting and doing road fuel consumption trials - to see if the technology has anything to meet the claims, or is a dud.

All the other posters are, quite rightly, making points which recommend the injection of a small amount of hydrogen and oxygen from electrolyzing water will not work. Not as a perpetual motion machine but as a sort of fuel additive to boost the efficiency of diesel fuel and to lower your fuel consumption (in terms of mpg).

What they don't seem to realise is the effort you are putting in to see if it is really a scam. Aside from stating (with scientific backing) the technology will not work, they are not prepared to get their hands dirty to prove their point. You, on the other hand, are prepared to do so, and accept it does not work if your development does not meet the target of improved fuel consumption.

What I think I am saying is that you do your development to prove or disprove a point and leave the negative posters to cheer if they are right or swallow pride if proven wrong.


Tuning to water injection in to diesel engines, for high performance engines.

As I understand it, assuming injection in to the air intake and not direct injection. The fine mist of water will cool down the in going air, raising the air density. The compressor will then compress a larger relative volume of air before stuffing it in to the engine cylinder bore being serviced.

As soon at the derv is injected in to the air and spray water cylinder, the water will partly quench the flame and flash to steam. When the power stroke is in action the expansion of hot gas is partly that of a derv engine, and partly as a steam engine. This combination of derv and steam raises the torque and work output from the diesel engine, and improve fuel consumption.

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

Great enthusiasm there! Go for it!

...if that isn't enough, I have plenty of room to add some additional batteries for it to draw its power from. I have a new technology called a battery charger, that can be plugged in, overnight if need be. LOL. If power consumption is the only real issue, that is easily solved.

The issue is from where the power is coming.

Rather than charging batteries to then carry the (heavy) batteries around, far better is to generate the H2 overnight and then carry the collected gas (much lighter!) to fuel the engine.

The problem with electrically generating the hydrogen on the truck is that you are using the truck engine to do the generating (which is then partially fuelled by the generated hydrogen). It's like trying to climb over a wall by pulling upwards on your own socks. You can't just 'create' power.

IF adding some kind of fuel treatment, octane booster, acetone, mothballs or whatever, to gas or diesel, gives better economy, why not use it? Why buy higher octane gasoline?

For your setup, I'd expect you to get best mileage from making your own biodiesel and also from biogas. Both are quite easy to do if you have the space and time. Very easy if you have a good supply of farm waste!

People put Propane add-on systems on their Diesel motors every day. If somehow adding more fuel to the fire helps them run better, (the propane systems I have seen are all for high performance), why wont adding Hydrogen to the mix help?...

It is a question of quantity and proportion. Propane is used as a fuel and in a high proportion.

If buying a cylinder of Hydrogen from the local welding shop, and injecting pure Hydrogen into the mixture that way helps efficiency, why wont generating the Hydrogen in the vehicle work?

Now yes, injecting hydrogen from a gas cylinder can indeed work if your engine is tuned to use it. You are using the hydrogen as a fuel from an external fuel source.

Using your engine to generate its own fuel cannot work usefully. It's like trying to drag yourself upwards by pulling upwards on your own socks. The HHO scam is a very complicated way of trying to do that, but it is still a "perpetual motion machine" scam.

What about California's Hydrogen Highway? There are Internal Combustion Engine vehicles that DO run on Hydrogen alone. But they have to have specialized, high pressure, crashproof cylinders for Hydrogen storage.

Exactly so. you fill up with hydrogen like you would with diesel or petrol.

Similarly, you can't usefully use those hydrogen powered engines to generate their own hydrogen again for infinite mileage...

...There are lots of people, that are unwilling to let go of their preconceived ideas about this technology, due to the fact that there have been so many scams involved with it.

This scam has done the rounds back in the 1970's. If it works, why isn't it being used everywhere?

... But wait, it does work, as a scam... It is one of the more 'clever' scams.


I think the bio-fuels ideas are a much better way to go.

Good luck,
Martin

---

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

One of the challenges here, IMO, is that we're talking about diesel engines which typically run much more efficiently than any other kinds of piston internal combustion engines already. That is assuming the engine is properly maintained/tuned, already has high compression ratios, a supercharger or a turbocharger (used in the efficiency context rather than for drag racing!), and intercooler (to raise incoming air density).

The illusion, possibly from the gasoline powered car sector, with those devices is that they are there for hot-rodders or drag racers, when the modern refined versions really originate from long haul trucking and aircraft technology, which rely on efficiency for practicality and economy.

All I'm suggesting in the above is that take care not to underestimate the existing technology of the engine with regards to efficiency.

Having said that, as you know some diesels are supposed to be quite capable of running on alchohol, and purified plant oils directly, maybe there's the possiblity to enhance the burn somehow, and good luck with your tests.

My own feeling is that the relative density is an important factor, and the power output change of a diesel engine with adding small quantities of hydrogen/oxygen would not be noticeable. Also that burning diesel to produce Hydrogen via the alternator sounds like a lossy process, whereas buying bottled Hydrogen (Which comes mostly from fossil fuels anyway, so would probably have proportionate cost to other fuels) or setting up your own in-ground low-pressure storage units using a mains powered electrolysis rig would be far more cost effective if hydrogen works at all in the engine.

Personally, As a backup plan I'd be setting up a still and making crude vodka, that way if the hydrogen doesn't work, then you can try the moonshine, and if that doesn't work and fuel prices rise too high, you can stay home and drink it instead.

Have fun and good luck!, I'll be interested to see how things pan out. [Have *some* idea of the hurdles to overcome as I've been involved with Turbine design, of engine and wind varieties, and several eco-startups. Universally the challenge was understanding the prior art, It is difficult to improve on technologies that have been refined over 100 years or more, But it has happened]

Jason

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

I'm glad that none of you are designing auto engines or road diesels. Making water into hydrogen and oxygen is trivial in a lab. Most chemistry classes are given a demonstration of decomposing water into the two gasses and collected in separate calibrated tubes. Every time one obtains two volumes of hydrogen to one of oxygen. And a bill from the power company for the energy consumed in the process. Not to mention the losses in making the AC mains current into direct current. At best the rectifiers eat more than a half volt making AC into pulsating DC. Which works fine for the lab as the currents are small and so is the yield of gas.

I'll stick with our Prius for moving down the road. When we press the brake pedal it turns the three phase motor into a three phase generator which is rectified into DC to recover the kinetic energy into the big battery. All braking action also stops the IC engine until one is well under way again. At about three MPH the energy remaining is quite small (about a brisk walking speed) and an electric motor applies pressure to the mechanical friction brakes. Note well that if one has to make an emergency stop the pump pressurizes the brakes at once and turns the KE into heat.

As one who has used torches that were fueled by many gasses, including hydrogen, I might point out the flame of the latter is nearly invisible. But, very hot. Even a torch with no oxygen added the flame is just plain hard to see.

I would not spend any of my hard earned money on any scheme to run our car on water derived hydrogen.

I'm glad that none of you are designing auto engines or road diesels. Making water into hydrogen and oxygen is trivial in a lab. Most chemistry classes are given a demonstration of decomposing water into the two gasses and collected in separate calibrated tubes. Every time one obtains two volumes of hydrogen to one of oxygen. And a bill from the power company for the energy consumed in the process. Not to mention the losses in making the AC mains current into direct current. At best the rectifiers eat more than a half volt making AC into pulsating DC. Which works fine for the lab as the currents are small and so is the yield of gas.

I'll stick with our Prius for moving down the road. When we press the brake pedal it turns the three phase motor into a three phase generator which is rectified into DC to recover the kinetic energy into the big battery. All braking action also stops the IC engine until one is well under way again. At about three MPH the energy remaining is quite small (about a brisk walking speed) and an electric motor applies pressure to the mechanical friction brakes. Note well that if one has to make an emergency stop the pump pressurizes the brakes at once and turns the KE into heat.

As one who has used torches that were fueled by many gasses, including hydrogen, I might point out the flame of the latter is nearly invisible. But, very hot. Even a torch with no oxygen added the flame is just plain hard to see.

I would not spend any of my hard earned money on any scheme to run our car on water derived hydrogen.

It is an interesting exercise that may show whether the whole issue of using water, electrolysed to it's components, via 12 rectified DC supply can improve the fuel consumption of an existing diesel or petrol engine. Sniper is taking up the cudgels to see if this approach is a load of BS or not.

What it is not is an exercise in futility, and will ignite or close the claims/debate.

Regarding the Toyota Prius, I have 2 small issues -

First: the use of a IC (petrol) engine to charge the batteries which power the electric propulsion. This acts as a normal road going engine, and has to rev from zero to flat out like any other IC motor.

Would it not have been better to link the car engine to a generator, running at 3,000 rpm with good really clean exhaust all optimised for 3,000 rpm only. The generator would charge the batteries and, in turn drive a bigger set of electric motors/generator. The mpg return would be much much better than the Prius can currently get, and the exhaust would have polluted at around 50 gm CO2 per Km rather than the 109 gm it currently does.

Second: diesel cars competing directly with the Prius taken on back to back runs have given real world fuel consumptions between 5% and 25% better than the Prius.

I will stick to the diesel cars we have for better fuel consumptions guaranteed!

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

... Would it not have been better to link the car engine to a generator, running at 3,000 rpm with good really clean exhaust all optimised for 3,000 rpm only. The generator would charge the batteries and, in turn drive a bigger set of electric motors/generator. The mpg return would be much much better than the Prius can currently get, and the exhaust would have polluted at around 50 gm CO2 per Km rather than the 109 gm it currently does.

Any real design numbers to back up your claims?...

How is the drive transferred (what is the transmission system) for your petrol?-battery-electric drive? (What efficiency?)

Second: diesel cars competing directly with the Prius taken on back to back runs have given real world fuel consumptions between 5% and 25% better than the Prius.

That is all a question of what you test. I can easily think of a back-to-back test where the Prius-type technology will easily win, and lose elsewhere.

I will stick to the diesel cars we have for better fuel consumptions guaranteed!

Tried and tested is indeed reliable, but not necessarily the best.

Hence how we've had a very good run out of old technology and fossil fuels but now must very quickly change before we more than cook out own gooses!


Good luck,
Martin

---

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

I will have to think the reply to your comments ML1.

But the drive is direct drive via gearless electric motors (as found in the Tesla Motors). The electrical efficiency is expected to be between 92% and 95%.

The Prius petrol motor is 27% efficient in extracting KE/Work from the heat engine (at the veery very best). For comparison the modern second generation common rail diesel, injecting fuel at 20,000+ bar, is 43% efficient.

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

If we're talking about Diesels, their basic mode of operation is the same one that causes pinging/preignition in the standard internal combustion engine.

When you compress the fuel/air mixture, it gets hot, and as it gets hot, if you have a combustible mixture at that temperature, it burns.

The conventional way of keeping things from overheating is to introduce a little bit of excess fuel and let it carry off the heat. Alternately (though less popular) is to introduce a little bit too little, which prevents the combustion from reaching as high a temperature.

The big change on a diesel is that you compress air (without fuel), achieve the high temperature, and then introduce the fuel, which ignites.

If you use a fumigant (propane, hydrogen, whatever) you aren't compressing air, you are compressing a fuel/air mixture -- and you run the risk of preignition.

I didn't say it was impossible. I am simply pointing out that it is not without risk.

If you break it, you own both parts.

I want to keep it in one piece.......

There are regular water injection systems, and propane injection systems, which are used on diesel engines. If I can use Hydrogen, and if it turns out to be non-detrimental to the engine, and IF it ends up working to improve mileage, then it will be a win-win situation. Lots of IF's but I am willing to try just about anything at this point.

Paying over $300 to fill up my personal/work pickup is just outrageous.

There is a fundamental difference between water, and propane/hydrogen.

No matter how hard you squeeze a water/air mixture, it isn't going to ignite.

The danger is when you add another fuel at the intake, and it ignites before the diesel is injected.

---