No additional energy is available from added water.
It may allow for slightly increased efficiency in the
burning of the gasoline depending upon the design of
the engine, but it'll never yield more than the energy
available in the gasoline (or whatever combustible
fuel is being used).

What is the kcal/mole of available energy for
liquid water?

How are you going to burn something that's already
completely oxidized?

I very much doubt that any credible science show
ever demonstrated water as fuel.

"Greg Neill" <gneillREM at (no spam) OVEsympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:48419ca5$0$23425$9a6e19ea at (no spam) news.newshosting.com...
No additional energy is available from added water.
It may allow for slightly increased efficiency in the
burning of the gasoline depending upon the design of
the engine, but it'll never yield more than the energy
available in the gasoline (or whatever combustible
fuel is being used).

What is the kcal/mole of available energy for
liquid water?

How are you going to burn something that's already
completely oxidized?

I very much doubt that any credible science show
ever demonstrated water as fuel.

Let me ask you this Greg,
what in the electric current being supplied
actually does the seperation of hydrogen from water?
Is it Volts?
amps?
or
wattage?

gdewilde at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c218e5f8-304e-4182-96eb-730f434e30fc at (no spam) x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On May 31, 3:37 am, "Spaceman" <space... at (no spam) yourclockmalfunctioned.duh
wrote:

and that makes me know you speak of bullshit only.
You must work for an oil company.


Hello James,

Yes, you are correct.

Corporate Fascism is totally un-cool.

Hi there!
It is really sad, the group fighting this has the same
mentality of the group of people that were saying stuff like
"The Wright Brothers? They are crazy, don't listen to them"
They want to make a heavier than air machine fly without a balloon?
what morons!
It just will not work, it violates laws of phycis.
and on and on....

Then shut the fuck up and build some experements. You'll quickly learn
that trading 100HP for 2HP won't keep a car in motion.

"AZ Nomad" <aznomad.3 at (no spam) PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote in message
news:slrng43d2g.k09.aznomad.3 at (no spam) ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net...
Then shut the fuck up and build some experements. You'll quickly learn
that trading 100HP for 2HP won't keep a car in motion.

It is pretty sad you think this way.
That is not what is happening at all.
So says a liar.

LOL

It is kinda funny though when you see words like this.
because it can work, and already does in reality.
Liar.

"Spaceman" <spaceman at (no spam) yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote in message
news:_9SdneDQ3qWuNtzVnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d at (no spam) comcast.com
"Greg Neill" <gneillREM at (no spam) OVEsympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:48419ca5$0$23425$9a6e19ea at (no spam) news.newshosting.com...
No additional energy is available from added water.
It may allow for slightly increased efficiency in the
burning of the gasoline depending upon the design of
the engine, but it'll never yield more than the energy
available in the gasoline (or whatever combustible
fuel is being used).
What is the kcal/mole of available energy for
liquid water?
How are you going to burn something that's already
completely oxidized?
I very much doubt that any credible science show
ever demonstrated water as fuel.
Let me ask you this Greg,
what in the electric current being supplied
actually does the seperation of hydrogen from water?
Is it Volts?
amps?
or
wattage?

Potential separates the + and - charges of the
Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms (breaking the bond).
Each bond takes a certain fixed amount of energy
to break (Joules). It takes about 463 kiloJoules
to break the bonds in a mole of H2O.

The individual ions (hydrogen and oxygen) then
constitute charge carriers in the electric current
that will then flow due to the potential bewteen
the cathode and anode.

Multiply the voltage by the current to obtain the
wattage.

So, Volts provides the potential difference to
break the bonds. The current is a measure of the
rate that the water is being torn apart. The
power (watts) is how much energy you need to put
into the system to do the separating and carrying
of the charges (atoms) to their electrodes.

Note that when you burn the collected hydrogen
(which spontaneously combines to form H2 -- it
doesn't stay monatomic), you only get back about
286 kJ/mole. This is because during burning H2
bond has to be broken when making the H2O bonds.

On Sat, 31 May 2008 14:08:35 -0400, Spaceman <spaceman at (no spam) yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote:

gdewilde at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c218e5f8-304e-4182-96eb-730f434e30fc at (no spam) x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On May 31, 3:37 am, "Spaceman" <space... at (no spam) yourclockmalfunctioned.duh
wrote:
and that makes me know you speak of bullshit only.
You must work for an oil company.

Hello James,

Yes, you are correct.

Corporate Fascism is totally un-cool.

Hi there!
It is really sad, the group fighting this has the same
mentality of the group of people that were saying stuff like
"The Wright Brothers? They are crazy, don't listen to them"
They want to make a heavier than air machine fly without a balloon?
what morons!
It just will not work, it violates laws of phycis.
and on and on....

Then shut the fuck up and build some experements. You'll quickly learn
that trading 100HP for 2HP won't keep a car in motion.

Electrolysis is TOTALLY current driven.
As GUARANTEED by Faraday's law of electrolysis. Use an electron to move
an electron.

The voltage determines whether the reaction will be exothermic,
endothermic, or neutral. Or if it occurs at all.

The reaction voltage will typically be 1.38 volts, but this is
temperature dependent. This also assumes platinized platinum electrodes.
Stainless steel will add the hydrogen overvoltage of iron, which can be
as much as an additional volt contributing to heat loss and trashing the
efficiency.

If you have electricity and want hydrogen, sell the electricity, buy
some methane, and reform the methane. The process is ridiculously more
efficient as its exergy preservation is far higher.

Don Lancaster wrote:

Electrolysis is TOTALLY current driven.
As GUARANTEED by Faraday's law of electrolysis. Use an electron to move
an electron.

The voltage determines whether the reaction will be exothermic,
endothermic, or neutral. Or if it occurs at all.

The reaction voltage will typically be 1.38 volts, but this is
temperature dependent. This also assumes platinized platinum electrodes.
Stainless steel will add the hydrogen overvoltage of iron, which can be
as much as an additional volt contributing to heat loss and trashing the
efficiency.

Don, could you explain the origin and calculation of the over-voltage a
little for me ? It's always intruiged me.

Graham

AZ Nomad wrote:
On Sat, 31 May 2008 14:08:35 -0400, Spaceman <spaceman at (no spam) yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote:

gdewilde at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c218e5f8-304e-4182-96eb-730f434e30fc at (no spam) x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On May 31, 3:37 am, "Spaceman" <space... at (no spam) yourclockmalfunctioned.duh
wrote:
and that makes me know you speak of bullshit only.
You must work for an oil company.

Hello James,

Yes, you are correct.

Corporate Fascism is totally un-cool.

Hi there!
It is really sad, the group fighting this has the same
mentality of the group of people that were saying stuff like
"The Wright Brothers? They are crazy, don't listen to them"
They want to make a heavier than air machine fly without a balloon?
what morons!
It just will not work, it violates laws of phycis.
and on and on....

Then shut the fuck up and build some experements. You'll quickly learn
that trading 100HP for 2HP won't keep a car in motion.


The beauty of the scientific method is that it TOTALLY ELIMINATES the
need for utterly pointless experiments.

http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu08.asp

Robert Adsett wrote:
In article <6abp8tF36ndu8U1 at (no spam) mid.individual.net>, Don Lancaster says...
Robert Adsett wrote:
.
First energy can neither be created or destroyed(1).
A highly deceptive gross oversimplification that can cause untold grief.
And demonstrates a profound and monumental ignorance of all things
thermodynamic.

A highly useful principle. The basis of much of our understanding of
the physical universe. The conservation laws are some of the most
powerful laws known to us.

Yes, other considerations are often needed but when conservation of
energy is sufficient to show an error nothing more is necessary.

Let's see.

By conservation of energy --

You fill your gas tank and drive around town.
The gas tank ends up empty.

You still have exactly as much energy as you started with, right?
Nothing has changed, right?

Of course even if a process doesn't violate conservation of energy
doesn't mean it's doable or practical. But if a process does violate
conservation of energy (as the one we've been futilely discussing does)
then we need not discuss 'other considerations'. And since conservation
of energy is generally simple to consider it makes a very good first
filter.

"Robert Adsett" <sub2 at (no spam) aeolusdevelopment.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.22aba1d81bbc17e19898f2 at (no spam) free.teranews.com...
Of course even if a process doesn't violate conservation of energy
doesn't mean it's doable or practical. But if a process does violate
conservation of energy (as the one we've been futilely discussing does)
then we need not discuss 'other considerations'. And since conservation
of energy is generally simple to consider it makes a very good first
filter.

It is not violating law of conservation of energy at all.
You must be an oil guy.

On Sat, 31 May 2008 19:03:05 -0400, Spaceman
spaceman at (no spam) yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote:

"Robert Adsett" <sub2 at (no spam) aeolusdevelopment.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.22aba1d81bbc17e19898f2 at (no spam) free.teranews.com...
Of course even if a process doesn't violate conservation of energy
doesn't mean it's doable or practical. But if a process does violate
conservation of energy (as the one we've been futilely discussing does)
then we need not discuss 'other considerations'. And since
conservation
of energy is generally simple to consider it makes a very good first
filter.

It is not violating law of conservation of energy at all.
You must be an oil guy.