THE PACK Message Boards

Okay, I've been waiting for someone to figure this out for a long time, and my friend sent me this link out of nowhere. Ever wished your garden hoes put out fuel for your car? Well, it's not as far out as you might think.

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/2006/06/waterfuel.html

Seen it.


Its H2O thats been converted to HHO. A chemical change needs to take place. You can't add water to a fuel tank and expect it to burn. And I bet the water needs to be purified.

Reminds me of Hyde from that 70's show and his car that runs on water. A most talked about topic in the "circle"

Yeah... well.. guess I've been "out of the loop" for longer than I though...*sigh*

Wow. Even if it's not just pouring tap-water into your tank and driving on it, it's still an alternative fuel source that seems easy to manufacture, clean-burning in terms of pollution, and remarkably efficient. We may yet be able to keep civilization going without wiping out life on Earth. So, I'm game.

Now, if we can just make sure the oil companies don't buy up all the patents and stick them on the shelf along-side Nikoli Tesla's wireless power.

It's not really a fuel source, since you need energy from somwhere to disassocate the water molecules. And, since it isn't, due to thermodynamics, you'll end up putting in more energy than you get out of it.

Still, surely the heat ray technology might be of some use, such as for invading neighboring planets.

Lupin wrote:It's not really a fuel source, since you need energy from somwhere to disassocate the water molecules. And, since it isn't, due to thermodynamics, you'll end up putting in more energy than you get out of it.

Such is the way of the machine. Getting more out then you put in is impossible.

But, it could be a nifty way of storing energy. Energy stored in gasoline can be combusted, but you get a lot of pollutants. It looks like the only break-down product left behind is water. (Even if you get left over hydrogen or oxygen gas, then, gee, ouch. That's going to hurt the environment.)

Couple that with a benign manufacturing process--say, a vast array of solar panels organized on an artificial ring around the planet, tethered to the surface along numerous spokes by way of nanotubule ribbons-nothing too fancy or difficult to build. Oh, it's 2005. I thought it was 20,005. How about I bang some rocks together, and God will magically bestow fire?

Howsabout we coat our rooftops with soalr panels?

Or, ye good old ethanol powered stuff.

OR WALK.

i am not so sure about those..... I mean there really new and we haven't gotten the kinks out (not that we have with the ones we have now but....) Iam still a fan of nuclear energy i hate people who say omg nuclear energy are you mad how could you say such a thing look at what they make out of those. WELL PEOPLE MADE THAT NOT THE PLUTONIUM 246! One scientist lady invisioned a world made prosperous by unlimited nuclear energy, her notes were used by the manhatten project to make the atomic and later the nuclear bomb. Iam not such a fan of antimatter because of it's pottential danger of exploding when it comes in contact with anything at all. and nuclear fussion worries me if it's self sustaining what's to keep if from growing and growing and growing..... nuthing at all.

Well, dosn't fusion stop once it gets around to iron? we start with hydrogen, right, and it turns into helium and so on unitll it hits iron, i think.

I think. I haven't gotten to chemistry yet.