Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Proof that HHO is a Scam - Aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam.shtml

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Proof that HHO is a Scam - Aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam.shtml

    So it's not just me and a few heretical members here that aren't convinced:

    [URL="http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam.shtml"]The proof that HHO is
    How much gas is needed to reduce fuel consumption by 40%?

    Well the first thing is to work out how much energy it requires to keep an average vehicle cruising at(say) 65mph. According to this source it takes around 20HP to cruse at that speed.

    Let's convert that to electrical energy by multiplying by 746 (the number of watts in a horsepower). We get 14,920, or roughly 15KW.

    Now, if we want to replace 40% of that power with energy from HHO gas, we'll need to use at least 15KW x 0.4 which comes to 6,000 watts (6KW).

    If we assume that the electrolysis cell which converts electricity into HHO gas is 100% efficient (which it certainly isn't) then that means we'll need a massive 6000W/12V or 500 amps of current to make that much gas.

    Suddenly those 30A wires are looking rather inadequate aren't they?

    What's more, since the average car's alternator can only deliver about 80A of current, this means the battery would have to deliver the other 520A and (in the case of even a good 80AH unit) would be flat in under 10 minutes.

    Of course these simple calculations ignore the fact that electrolysis cells are not 100% efficient and the even more important fact that the average internal combustion engine is only around 30% efficient -- so even if we delivered 6KW of HHO gas to the engine it would only produce under 2KW of actual power.

    With these inefficiencies taken into account we'd actually need a staggering 1,500A of electrical current to generate the necessary HHO gas to reduce our fuel input by 40%.

    So clearly the math doesn't add up. There's just no way you can extract enough electrical energy from your car's automotive system to create the gas volumes needed to create any meaningful amount of energy.

    The page also links to What Scammers Say about this Site but the link to 'Discuss this in the forums' is dead so obviously that means....

  • #2
    You obviously don't take into consideration the fact where the economy comes from. The hho is not a source of fuel, it is just a catalyst and thus is needed in small quantities. If you would analyze the gasoline that you have in your local gas stations, you would find out that it is far from ideal. It does not burn fully. It has hydrocarbon chains that should range from C5 to C12, but it often, or almost always contains a fair percentage of longer hydrocarbon chains, more in the range of kerosine and diesel. These do not burn fully in the explosion that happens in the engine and are released out along with the exhaust gases. And that is why they had to add catalytic convertes in the exhayst - just to bur those unburned hydrocarbons for better emmisions. The truth is that hho only helps to get the most of it out of fuels. and that is a fact I have proven more than 10 times. You are right on that if the hho would be used as pure fuel and produced in ordinary fashion, it would consume way too much power to be viable. But in most cases hho is used just as a booster. Kinda like putting a bit of gasoline on wet wood so it would burn better. The confirmation about those hydrocarbon chain stuff you can get at the fuel from plastic waste thread. It all becomes clear once you see what various fuels are made of.
    It's better to wear off by working than to rust by doing nothing.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Jetijs View Post
      The hho is not a source of fuel, it is just a catalyst and thus is needed in small quantities.
      Yours is an argument I hadn't heard before but is also an entirely unorthodox one given the very name of this here forum.

      As for the economy, I've never seen hydrogen's role as anything more than an energy currency and an inefficient one at that although the inexpensive electrolysis catalyst discovery I reported on may improve that to a degree as we're seemingly headed for a hydrogen economy anyway.

      Comment


      • #4
        Hi.
        I have a long history of hho stuff. You can see all my hho related pictures with diffenent size and type cells here:
        http://www.emuprim.lv/jetijs/index.p...el=album&id=12

        Too often I had to bttle with skeptics and did not have any arguments about why there is economy if you put a booster in a car. I had the results but could not explain them properly. Only when I started working on plastic pyrolysis and got into all the fuel stuff much more deeper, did I understand where the energy comes from. I had another thread here:
        http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ght=carburetor

        it is about efficient carburetor designs based on some older patents that have quite a story behind them. The jist of it is that every liter of pure high quality gasoline has the power to move the average car about 100 km. I don't know about that, but I am sure that you can double your mileage if you could get pure gasoline without any additives, if you used air ionizer in the air intake and boosted that with a bit of hho or hydrogen. Unfortunately the gasoline in your gas tanks is far from perfect, not only it contains longer hydrocarbon chains in great percentage than needed (diesel, kerosine, petrolium), it also contains even smaller than needed hydrocarbon chains which can be buthanol, propanol or other waste products of oil refinery process that no one will notice anyway. I have tested it in a small pyrolysis unit, at certain temeratures only certain hydrocarbon lengths should evaporate and condensate. So gasoline should evaporate fully only in certain temperature range. But the truth is that around 15% evaporated way before those temperatures were reached, and around 10% of the fuel was left in the reactor even at higher than needed temperatures. This proves that the fuel is not gasoline but a mix of different fuels that all need their own specific conditions to burn fully. So no wonder we waste so much fuel that is unburned and turned into unuseful heat in the catalytic converter only to decrease hydrocarbons in the emissions. That is the fuel you paid for that is burned in that catalytic converter, but you are turning it into heat instead of torque. So hho is a way to recover some of those losses in heat. But the whole hho deal is rather complex to get to success. Many fail and then claim that all this hho stuff is just a scam (I am not talking about you right now). They fail for various reasons. Either they have a crapy cell, or not a good power limiter to a cell, or the power levels that go in the cell are not adjusted to the sweetspot (every car has its own sweetspot) or the engine computer is working against the changes and an EFIE or different approach is needed to fool the computer, othervise there will be no economy or even increased fuel consumption. There are several important steps which you must take in order to get the results. Miss one step and you are almost guarantied to fail.
        Jetijs
        It's better to wear off by working than to rust by doing nothing.

        Comment


        • #5
          Well, that would help explain Aaron's confusion about water fuel which I brought to his attention:

          To quote Stan Meyer is one thing, but since you accept it as fact, I wanted to know what evidence existed? (I assumed nitrogen might be needed to reduce pre-ignition combustion (before the pistons reach TDC). That's why I asked for evidence. As for skeptics, we're not all evil. Isn't Farmhand one?

          BTW: Can you explain the discrepancy between what I've bolded in your posts:
          First of all, it is not a theory, associates of mine have taken it beyond what I have and reducing propane usage on a jet as I said is a phenomenal achievement by itself. Several others have gone all the way. The red car in the OZ nitro cell documents is owned by a friend of someone I know. It runs on 100% water with a pinch of salt, a coil around the cell and a vacuum on the cell but also ambient air comes into mix with the hho. It has a lawnmower carb on the engine and runs on this fuel exclusively.

          But on that OZ Nitro cell thread, you state:

          high mileage with lawnmower carburetor - but low power
          I remember you going into all of that.

          With this old car: https://www.google.com/search?q=376mpg+opel+shell

          376 miles per gallon Opel - had a lawnmower carburetor, was stripped down to bare essentials and actually did 376 miles per gallon. This test was done by Shell Oil Company. It was very low power but did prove the point about vaporizing the gasoline.

          We don't have the details, but I'm sure gasoline vaporization is part of the red car but they don't discuss that. They make it look like water fuel, but 2 gallons of gas an 2 liters of water - sounds to me more like a very efficient water vapor injection system and all the nitrogen part of it could be a red herring.

          I understand that nitrogen can play a key role but looking at the fact that the red car has a lawnmower carburetor, I'm inclined to believe it was a snail using gasoline vapor and water vapor supplement.


          ...and then:
          Now you see why I'm so skeptical about 'water fuel cells'?

          Comment


          • #6
            your ignorance is problematic

            I'm not confused about anything and I'm tired of your mouth.

            You're completely involved in disinformation by spreading your
            ignorance all over this forum and it will come to an end soon.

            Even MIT's PLASMATRON can give a 30% increase on a gas engine
            as a matter of scientific fact and the original Russian patents were
            using water as the fuel to be cracked and not gasoline.
            Sincerely,
            Aaron Murakami

            Books & Videos https://emediapress.com
            Conference http://energyscienceconference.com
            RPX & MWO http://vril.io

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Jetijs View Post
              ...it is about efficient carburetor designs...
              I thought fuel injection replaced carburetion for its efficiency, but you're right--it hasn't completely eliminated unburnt fuel from the exhaust and your explanation as to why does appear to make sense. Do you know if anyone has comparison tested the exhaust of an engine using varying uniformities of hydrocarbon chains? I'm sure engine temperature, ambient air temperature and other factors might also affect the percent of fuel burnt during ignition.

              I understand the pros and cons of carburetors which is partly why I posted the above experiment Aaron mentioned, but more importantly, I wanted your comments since it appears to support your argument for HHO as a gasoline additive.

              Comment


              • #8
                Hi All

                Well Jetis is totally right, but there are also more things that go on that can't be seen.

                I have posted in two other threads here about nitrogen and what happens when elements break and combine, now there is also a third item, transforming of elements such as in nuclear reactions. Now I am not saying that there is a nuclear reaction going on, but there is an atomic change of state and it can be done very simply, below is a picture of a 316SS electrode after running 20 seconds in a system of electrolysis that I have designed and have two patents pending, the voltage was 2.7v and the current 3.5amps. You can see what has happened to that electrode, the colouring alone indicates temperatures in excess of 1000c to cause the green and pink colouring to 316 SS along with an oxidation and reduction at the surface area.

                By using different elements it can transform them into some very interesting items. this is a hot potato at the moment "excuse the pun", and as so I will not be going into this any more on an open forum, it was just to show what can happen if things are done in the right way.

                Just tried to upload the photo but the file is too big, sorry about that, if I get a chance I will find another way

                Mike

                Comment


                • #9
                  Aaron, I have sent the photo via skype to you, if you can post it as I do not want to create an account just for one photo

                  thanks

                  Mike

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Plasma electrolysis

                    Hello All .

                    HHO is great No scam .

                    the cover up of the systems found on the internet are mostly scams .

                    one of them is the stanly meyers basic tube spitter , not one internet site tell what he did with the dynamo AC and the so called rotairy puls generator ect.

                    that clainm 1700% overunity if i remeber it right .

                    All i did see are not the right one ... however the bifilair coils look great.

                    Anyhow Plasma Electrolysis is about 8000% overunity .

                    At the moment i work on a new water Heater its right now steady >450% overunity .

                    running tests on Astronod on Vaughn Live [ Astronod on Vaughn Live [ http://vaughnlive.tv/astronod ] ]

                    anybody is welcome on my channel to see and ask questions live .

                    i do more things like tesla antenna` s hydrogen oxigen generation .

                    see ya there or here .

                    all the best .

                    John

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      bla bla

                      Originally posted by Michael John Nunnerley View Post
                      Hi All

                      Well Jetis is totally right, but there are also more things that go on that can't be seen.

                      I have posted in two other threads here about nitrogen and what happens when elements break and combine, now there is also a third item, transforming of elements such as in nuclear reactions. Now I am not saying that there is a nuclear reaction going on, but there is an atomic change of state and it can be done very simply, below is a picture of a 316SS electrode after running 20 seconds in a system of electrolysis that I have designed and have two patents pending, the voltage was 2.7v and the current 3.5amps. You can see what has happened to that electrode, the colouring alone indicates temperatures in excess of 1000c to cause the green and pink colouring to 316 SS along with an oxidation and reduction at the surface area.

                      By using different elements it can transform them into some very interesting items. this is a hot potato at the moment "excuse the pun", and as so I will not be going into this any more on an open forum, it was just to show what can happen if things are done in the right way.

                      Just tried to upload the photo but the file is too big, sorry about that, if I get a chance I will find another way

                      Mike
                      and what does that show?
                      Promises.
                      Oh, you forgot to tell that the MIB are hunting you down and forgot to mention some bible texts....

                      Scam, till proven otherwise.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by stevie1001 View Post
                        and what does that show?
                        Promises.
                        Oh, you forgot to tell that the MIB are hunting you down and forgot to mention some bible texts....

                        Scam, till proven otherwise.
                        You didn't read the Alchemy Through Vernon Roth's Alchemical Hydrogen Cells. When large mining companies start panicking as young, urban EF hacks begin selling gold-crusted electrodes on a daily basis, it'll be MJ Nunnerly and 'the Roth child' who'll be laughing all the way to their newly formed bank.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by AstroNod View Post
                          ... the systems found on the internet are mostly scams .
                          ...and for reasons you obviously don't begin to understand:

                          Anyhow Plasma Electrolysis is about 8000% overunity .
                          At the moment i work on a new water Heater its right now steady >450% overunity

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Photo link

                            Here is a link to the photo

                            ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting

                            Mike

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Aaron View Post
                              I'm not confused about anything and I'm tired of your mouth.

                              You're completely involved in disinformation by spreading your
                              ignorance all over this forum and it will come to an end soon.

                              Even MIT's PLASMATRON can give a 30% increase on a gas engine
                              as a matter of scientific fact and the original Russian patents were
                              using water as the fuel to be cracked and not gasoline.
                              related to cold plasma reforming

                              Plasma Fuel Reforming :: Ceramatec

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X