Water powered cars?
- Thread starter BaldvinE
- Start date
I'd think that the drag from wind turbines would offset the energy gained from a generator, efficiencies being what they are.
Solar panels could help, but the whole surface of the car would be needed to generate enough electricity to help while on the go. They could help charge the car while it is parked, though.
Solar panels could help, but the whole surface of the car would be needed to generate enough electricity to help while on the go. They could help charge the car while it is parked, though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of ... ines#2000s
The history of perpetual motion machines (also known as the history of free energy and history of over unity machines) dates back to the Middle Ages. For millennia, it was not clear whether such devices were possible, but the development of modern thermodynamics has shown that they are impossible. Many have attempted to construct the holy grail of energy production in spite of this. Proponents of perpetual motion machines often use other terms to describe their inventions including free energy devices, mechanisms, or formulas and over unity machines.
The history of perpetual motion machines (also known as the history of free energy and history of over unity machines) dates back to the Middle Ages. For millennia, it was not clear whether such devices were possible, but the development of modern thermodynamics has shown that they are impossible. Many have attempted to construct the holy grail of energy production in spite of this. Proponents of perpetual motion machines often use other terms to describe their inventions including free energy devices, mechanisms, or formulas and over unity machines.
It wouldn't be a perpetual motion machine if you would be able to harness enough energy from outside sources, such as solar panels, to make up for the parasitic losses, even if the net energy gain of the electrolysis process is zero.
So, maybe with the advent of vastly better solar panels (or the flux capacitor and "Mr. Fusion") it would be possible.
But, like I've said, this is really a moot point, as a much better answer is simply to use the power directly for an electric motor, as that would require much less power than electrolysis, and would never need filling up ....
I like these little thought experiments ... even though they may seem nuts ...
So, maybe with the advent of vastly better solar panels (or the flux capacitor and "Mr. Fusion") it would be possible.
But, like I've said, this is really a moot point, as a much better answer is simply to use the power directly for an electric motor, as that would require much less power than electrolysis, and would never need filling up ....
I like these little thought experiments ... even though they may seem nuts ...
I was primarily addressing: http://oupower.com/phpBB2/index.php?sid ... 81c49a50fd 
I agree it's not perpetual motion if you can find a way to use "free" energy to overcome the thermodynalmic, friction and other losses. In some of our desert areas, you could maybe use solar thermal in addition to light energy. Heck, in mountain driving, you can use gravity to recharge batteries. You just have to make sure you only drive downhill.
I agree it's not perpetual motion if you can find a way to use "free" energy to overcome the thermodynalmic, friction and other losses. In some of our desert areas, you could maybe use solar thermal in addition to light energy. Heck, in mountain driving, you can use gravity to recharge batteries. You just have to make sure you only drive downhill.
8) while the current theory of modern thermodynamics suggests that a perpetual motion machine is impossible, i personally feel that we dont fully understand the physical laws that govern the universe at this point. why do i say this? because we are still finding out new things on so many different levels that perhaps one day someone will make the break through that does allow a perpetual motion machine to actually function. i doubt it will be in our lifetimes, in fact i think my 14 year old niece will be long dead before it comes about, but i believe that it will come about.
BaldvinE":upfm3vfd said:I know this may sound stupid, what what are the technical problems with the old dream of powering cars with water?
It seems that with the current push for hydrogen powered cars they have settled on electric motors powered by hydrogen fuel cells as the answer.
The main problem seems to be the storage of the highly flammable hydrogen gas on board a car and in pumping stations.
But BMW and others have built prototypes of internal combustion engines running on hydrogen, so what is the main problem with running an internal combustion engine on hydrogen obtained from electrolyzing water from an on board tank?
Couldn't enough power be produced using an alternator, regenerative brakes, solar panels on the roof and maybe even small wind turbines working at speed?
Is the problem with the quantity of water needed?
I know this would probably not be efficient, and a much better and easier idea would be a pure electric vehicle, but I'm just curious ...
Water powered cars
: Surely you mean Steam.An Aussie did it years ago.
http://www.pritchardpower.com/Our%20History.html
Yea, steam cars are cool, and much older than that reference ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_car
...but, no I was wandering about electrolysis and hydrogen propulsion
...but, no I was wandering about electrolysis and hydrogen propulsion
cliffordthebigredtruck
Well-known member
k, I know I am a late-comer to this discussion, but...
-hydrogen is seperated from water by electrolysis-- you use energy to seperate the atoms out, and when they combine back together they release that energy. No extra energy is created, even in a perfect world you'd have the same amount of energy put in as taken out, thus no energy left over to power the vehicle.
-regenerative braking or wind tubines only recoup some of the energy already expended. You have to make the car move in the first place to make these work, and unless you are going downhill or have a strong wind (not headwind) naturally, that initial energy must come from somewhere. Even if we say they are 100% efficient (which they aren't), there is still no energy left on the table to get the car into motion to begin with.
All of this is just side-dressing to the real question-- where to get the "extra" energy from, to get the car moving. I assume the idea is to not burn things (ie fossil fuels, bio diesel, natural gas, etc), and that leaves very few options:
-Solar panels are a good source of "free" energy, but aren't quite there when it comes to supplying enough energy reliably. Close, but no cigar.
-electric grid, ie an electric car.
-you.
My personal choice? A combination of electrc grid and you. Have you ever heard of the "Twike"? http://www.twike.us/TWIKE_an _overview_usa.pdf I have been following them for a long time, and they are one of the very few "alternative" vehicles that seem to have a good balance between practicality and "green-ness." And since they've been around a few years they apparently aren't a fly-by-night organization. They're even approved for sale in the US, so I assume they have dot approval, which is really saying something.
I was also thinking that if a person set up a solar panel system at home to charge it off of, it could almost be totally self-sufficient.
alas, the price is hovering around $28k and I just can't justify it...
<edit> sorry for the hijacking of the thread, but all this talk of regenerative braking and free energy and whatnot reminded me of this car... I mean, what better source of free energy than your muscles?
-hydrogen is seperated from water by electrolysis-- you use energy to seperate the atoms out, and when they combine back together they release that energy. No extra energy is created, even in a perfect world you'd have the same amount of energy put in as taken out, thus no energy left over to power the vehicle.
-regenerative braking or wind tubines only recoup some of the energy already expended. You have to make the car move in the first place to make these work, and unless you are going downhill or have a strong wind (not headwind) naturally, that initial energy must come from somewhere. Even if we say they are 100% efficient (which they aren't), there is still no energy left on the table to get the car into motion to begin with.
All of this is just side-dressing to the real question-- where to get the "extra" energy from, to get the car moving. I assume the idea is to not burn things (ie fossil fuels, bio diesel, natural gas, etc), and that leaves very few options:
-Solar panels are a good source of "free" energy, but aren't quite there when it comes to supplying enough energy reliably. Close, but no cigar.
-electric grid, ie an electric car.
-you.
My personal choice? A combination of electrc grid and you. Have you ever heard of the "Twike"? http://www.twike.us/TWIKE_an _overview_usa.pdf I have been following them for a long time, and they are one of the very few "alternative" vehicles that seem to have a good balance between practicality and "green-ness." And since they've been around a few years they apparently aren't a fly-by-night organization. They're even approved for sale in the US, so I assume they have dot approval, which is really saying something.
I was also thinking that if a person set up a solar panel system at home to charge it off of, it could almost be totally self-sufficient.
alas, the price is hovering around $28k and I just can't justify it...
<edit> sorry for the hijacking of the thread, but all this talk of regenerative braking and free energy and whatnot reminded me of this car... I mean, what better source of free energy than your muscles?
I don't expect to get energy out of nothing, never did, never said I did, but to harness outside energy, such as with solar panels in order to power the car.
The whole water thing just adds another layer on an electric vehicle supplying enough power, just for the heck of it, and to piss off all those that believe in this Hydrogen economy dream which is starting to snowball out of control and straight into the arms of big oil.
Of course a pure electric vehicle would be the simplest, and using a combination of grid power and muscle energy is a great way to extend the range of an electric car. but I think with the next generation of solar panels, or the generation after that, we could have electric vehicles with an indefinite range. (if the research is left alone by those who would like it to fail)
The whole water thing just adds another layer on an electric vehicle supplying enough power, just for the heck of it, and to piss off all those that believe in this Hydrogen economy dream which is starting to snowball out of control and straight into the arms of big oil.
Of course a pure electric vehicle would be the simplest, and using a combination of grid power and muscle energy is a great way to extend the range of an electric car. but I think with the next generation of solar panels, or the generation after that, we could have electric vehicles with an indefinite range. (if the research is left alone by those who would like it to fail)
Kalashnikov
Active member
Just recently I had been researching about hydrogen powered cars and the like. The whole electrolysis just doesn't make enough hydrogen by ITSELF. Now if you had a gasoline-hydrogen hybrid, then it is a much better and efficient system. Although recent technological advances in the storage of hydrogen have been bringing an efficient pure hydrogen powered car more into reality. Palladium, one of the transition metals, can hold up to 900 time it's weight in hydrogen. The only problem is that this is a rare metal, like it's close relative platinum, so it still might not be too cost effective (use Titanium). But if such small amounts can hold so much, it COULD be effective depending on how much hydrogen a vehicle would use. This could be the first step in how to handle the storage of hydrogen in a vehicle effectively. After all, Platinum and palladium are already used in making automotive parts- catalytic contents of catalytic converters.
http://www.slowmovingwater.com/hydrides2.htm
There have been hydrogen-gasoline hybrids made using electrolysis. It greatly increases gas mileage and the efficiency of a gasoline engine. Although other things will do the same. The way I see it- the gasoline engine is still crude technology. There is much we can do to increase ti's efficiency. Most of the energy used in combusting gasoline is lost in the form of heat. The problem is with gasoline being a liquid. Propane has a much higher efficiency. When released into the atmosphere, the liquid expands into a gas. The combustion inside the engine is done with air and the gas vapors of propane. If we can get inject vaporized gasoline into the combustion chamber of the engine, than it's efficiency will go up tremendously. Vaporizing gasoline can be achieved by heating it., I believe to 400 degrees (F). Combine this with the hydrogen gas developed in electrolysis and you will have a very efficient gasoline-hydrogen hybrid engine. I've heard of people getting 100mpg using this technology. I recently did a very crude test using a small 8hp engine. When I cut the gas off from the carb, the engine died in 76 seconds. When I put a hose directing the gass from electrolysis into the intake of the engine, the engine lasted 101 seconds from the time I cut off the gasoline. That's about a 30 increase in efficiency with just the hydrogen. The technology for an efficient gasoline engine is there, it just needs to be used.
I plan to do some more testing an eventually hook-up some sort of electrolysis on my engine and vaporize the gasoline. I did a test already using electrolysis on my engine (EFI300) and driving around 10 or 15 miles and I didn't see a change in my gas gauge over the trip. It's not enough to see how much of a difference it makes, but I think it helped quite a bit.
http://www.slowmovingwater.com/hydrides2.htm
There have been hydrogen-gasoline hybrids made using electrolysis. It greatly increases gas mileage and the efficiency of a gasoline engine. Although other things will do the same. The way I see it- the gasoline engine is still crude technology. There is much we can do to increase ti's efficiency. Most of the energy used in combusting gasoline is lost in the form of heat. The problem is with gasoline being a liquid. Propane has a much higher efficiency. When released into the atmosphere, the liquid expands into a gas. The combustion inside the engine is done with air and the gas vapors of propane. If we can get inject vaporized gasoline into the combustion chamber of the engine, than it's efficiency will go up tremendously. Vaporizing gasoline can be achieved by heating it., I believe to 400 degrees (F). Combine this with the hydrogen gas developed in electrolysis and you will have a very efficient gasoline-hydrogen hybrid engine. I've heard of people getting 100mpg using this technology. I recently did a very crude test using a small 8hp engine. When I cut the gas off from the carb, the engine died in 76 seconds. When I put a hose directing the gass from electrolysis into the intake of the engine, the engine lasted 101 seconds from the time I cut off the gasoline. That's about a 30 increase in efficiency with just the hydrogen. The technology for an efficient gasoline engine is there, it just needs to be used.
I plan to do some more testing an eventually hook-up some sort of electrolysis on my engine and vaporize the gasoline. I did a test already using electrolysis on my engine (EFI300) and driving around 10 or 15 miles and I didn't see a change in my gas gauge over the trip. It's not enough to see how much of a difference it makes, but I think it helped quite a bit.
Here is a link to a thread about propane vs. gasoline. Also, there is an abundance of info on the web about propane.
Have fun,
Joe
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=46638
Have fun,
Joe
http://fordsix.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=46638
Kalashnikov
Active member
Yea, I read that right after my post and I realized what I said was incorrect. I don't quite remember how it was put, but there was something better about propane being stored as a liquid and then burned as a gas. I'll see if I can find where I read it.
rhetor
Famous Member
If you are going to go through all the effort to get electricity to make hydrogen from water, you are probably better off using the electricity to drive a motor and convert it into mechanical energy in half the steps.
I don't understand how a wind turbine on a vehicle could be practical, unless it is a boat.
I don't understand how a wind turbine on a vehicle could be practical, unless it is a boat.
Not to muddy the waters too much, but what about an alternative H2 source, albeit a dilute one? Try looking for information on gasification of biomass. One of the fuel gases that comes off that process is H2, along with CO. Check the following link:
http://members.tripod.com/~highforest/woodgas/woodfired.html
This couple here in Australia went around the country running only on woodgas. He talks about generating more H2, and hence more distance travelled from a given mass of wood, by introducing steam into the firebox of the gasifier and getting additional H2.
Of course, the performance of gasifier powered cars is significantly lower than petrol powered ones. You'd probably be lucky to reach a speed of 110-120 kmh in an optimal set-up. This is mostly from the slow combustion speed of the gas from a gasifier. That could be improved with a turbo though.
There are many examples of cars in Scandinavia running on gasifiers, so that's within cooee of you BaldvinE.
Teddy
http://members.tripod.com/~highforest/woodgas/woodfired.html
This couple here in Australia went around the country running only on woodgas. He talks about generating more H2, and hence more distance travelled from a given mass of wood, by introducing steam into the firebox of the gasifier and getting additional H2.
Of course, the performance of gasifier powered cars is significantly lower than petrol powered ones. You'd probably be lucky to reach a speed of 110-120 kmh in an optimal set-up. This is mostly from the slow combustion speed of the gas from a gasifier. That could be improved with a turbo though.
There are many examples of cars in Scandinavia running on gasifiers, so that's within cooee of you BaldvinE.
Teddy
"Who's currently at the forefront of this Hydrogen revolution? SHELL ...
Who bought the factory making revolutionary batteries that could have extended the range of electric cars manifold, only to shut it down? EXXON MOBIL " so spake Balbvin.
Think, the oil companies are not stupid, fully aware one day the oil supply will be exhausted or depleted to the point of being uneconomical. With the expansion of the developing world, eg China, India, etc, they are not concerned with the market being decreased. That is the least of their worries. Their concern is not having a product to sell when there is no economical oil to sell. It not any conspiracy, just good business planning.
When the horseless carriage came along, the smart buggy whip manufacture changed production to sparkplugs.
Transportation, both personal and commercial, are only a small part of the energy equation. Large comsumer of energy will have large stationary power plants of some sort; wind, hydro, geothermal, coal, nuclear---- The challenge and the quest is for the small, mobile power sources for cars and trucks. With the stationary power plants there are some options, the mobile power source are more limited.
I think we all would freak out if some body put a small nuclear power plants. There some small enough for satellites, even development and testing to power commercialand military jets.
________________________________________
"This couple here in Australia went around the country running only on woodgas. He talks about generating more H2, and hence more distance travelled from a given mass of wood, by introducing steam into the firebox of the gasifier and getting additional H2." posted by Teddy.
During WWII Paris taxis ran on carbon monoxide from onboard gas "generator" using charcoal; others ran on methane, had on board digesters using swine manure.
AH! leave it to the French to come up with that.
Who bought the factory making revolutionary batteries that could have extended the range of electric cars manifold, only to shut it down? EXXON MOBIL " so spake Balbvin.
Think, the oil companies are not stupid, fully aware one day the oil supply will be exhausted or depleted to the point of being uneconomical. With the expansion of the developing world, eg China, India, etc, they are not concerned with the market being decreased. That is the least of their worries. Their concern is not having a product to sell when there is no economical oil to sell. It not any conspiracy, just good business planning.
When the horseless carriage came along, the smart buggy whip manufacture changed production to sparkplugs.
Transportation, both personal and commercial, are only a small part of the energy equation. Large comsumer of energy will have large stationary power plants of some sort; wind, hydro, geothermal, coal, nuclear---- The challenge and the quest is for the small, mobile power sources for cars and trucks. With the stationary power plants there are some options, the mobile power source are more limited.
I think we all would freak out if some body put a small nuclear power plants. There some small enough for satellites, even development and testing to power commercialand military jets.
________________________________________
"This couple here in Australia went around the country running only on woodgas. He talks about generating more H2, and hence more distance travelled from a given mass of wood, by introducing steam into the firebox of the gasifier and getting additional H2." posted by Teddy.
During WWII Paris taxis ran on carbon monoxide from onboard gas "generator" using charcoal; others ran on methane, had on board digesters using swine manure.
AH! leave it to the French to come up with that.
rhetor
Famous Member
If we can come up with better energy density batteries, I think it may be the best solution to focus our efficiency on power generating plants and stations.
Package the energy into a battery using some Green and replenishable method, and drive your car all over the place. As long as you end up at another charging point.
Also, if we could create batteries that do not eat them selves (like a capacitor) we could reuse the battery. Simple, multi-purpose energy units. Like a gallon of gas.
Package the energy into a battery using some Green and replenishable method, and drive your car all over the place. As long as you end up at another charging point.
Also, if we could create batteries that do not eat them selves (like a capacitor) we could reuse the battery. Simple, multi-purpose energy units. Like a gallon of gas.
Platinum_Racing
Active member
BaldvinE":3okhlnyc said:
The nitrogen in those engines is compressed. It would take either a very large and heavy tank of water with a lot of electricity to get enough hydrogen. At least this is what I believe, not sure if it's true.
Similar threads
All Small Six
New Adventures in electrics fans and inline 6’s
