## Saturday, January 19, 2008

### Synthesis of Hydrogen technology HELP!!!

I know I haven't posted in weeks but I have been beating my head over this hydrogen thing. Basically I want to get something for next to nothing. Hydrogen is the almost easiest way to do this. but it naturally isn't turning out so easy. I think personally a lot of the problem is that there are a lot of people looking at pieces of the puzzle from very different angles and not synthesizing all known facts into a nice little bundle and coming out with the solution. I am by no means a genius all I want is to power my house and my car off of some hydrogen.

So the first thing I do which was a giant pain in the buttocks is figure out exactly how much hydrogen I would need for an Internal Combustion Engine vehicle ICE for short. I ran around trying to get the numbers which was very frustrating as I like many people hate math, but I am coming to learn that I need it, especially when trying to figure out how to snatch up some stinking hydrogen. So I start with my car:

2001 Nissan Quest Performance

-
3,275 cc 3.3 liters 6 V engine with 91.5 mm bore, 83 mm stroke, 9 compression ratio, overhead cam and two valves per cylinder
-
-
Fuel economy EPA highway (l/100km): 10.2
-
Multi-point injection fuel system
-
Main 76 liter unleaded fuel tank
-
Power: SAE and 127 kW , 170 HP @ 4,800 rpm; 200 ft lb , 271 Nm @ 2,800 rpm

Then I try to go through all that math and figure out how much fuel this thing burns a minute. So I start guestimating. I first figure that I run through a tank at my normal driving speed on long trips to be about 80mph or 130 km/h for you Euros. I figure I probably leave a liter or two in the tank before I underestimate and have to get out and walk with my gas can. So let's guess 75 liters. I can travel on average 310 miles or roughly 500km. So the math starts 500km / 130 km/h = 3.85 hours which in turn is 230.77 minutes which means I burn 75L / 230.77 minutes = .325 Liters per minute I went around the house looking for something that had roughly the same specs and I found this a bottle of Heinz Malt Vinegar that was 355mL which looking at it I thought it was quite a bit of gas to be going through in one minute.

That means even if I believe this John Heyward guy I am giving up 15 miles if my fuel situation is in fact achieving a 97% burn. I don't believe that it is, but hey what do I know right. So then there is more math, now this math I think is extremely sketchy because it involves liquid to gas conversions and moles and joules and it gets really confusing but here goes. So I figure that 1 liter of water is 1kg so I then transpose that onto fuel. 1kg for a liter of gasoline this would mean that guessing on the high side I would have to make .400 kg per minute to be safe to use in my ICE to drive down the street that translates into 24kg per hour. Ok what does that really mean? Well under normal room temperature electrolysis I would need 60kwh to get 1kg of hydrogen. yeah but what does that really mean. Well 1kg of hydrogen holds 12oMegaJoules per kg, gasoline in comparison holds 44 MegaJoules but to get 1kg of hydrogen I would have to expend 216 Megajoules of regular electricity. So I would be at a energy deficit. This in effect is the energy conundrum.

What in the world is a Joule you ask?

One joule is the work done, or energy expended, by a force of one newton moving one meter along the direction of the force. This quantity is also denoted as a newton-meter with the symbol N·m. Note that torque also has the same units as work, but the quantities are not identical. In elementary units:

$\, 1\, \mathrm{J}=1\, \mathrm{N} \cdot \mathrm{m}$

$\, 1\, \mathrm{J}=1\, \mathrm{kg} \cdot \frac{\mathrm{m}^{2}}{\mathrm{s}^{2}}$

One joule is also:

• The work required to move an electric charge of one coulomb through an electrical potential difference of one volt; or one coulomb volt, with the symbol C·V.
• The work done to produce power of one watt continuously for one second; or one watt second (compare kilowatt-hour), with the symbol W·s. Thus a kilowatt-hour is 3,600,000 joules or 3.6 megajoules
I desperately searched for the conversion formula that would sustain my vehicle flat out but I really couldn't figure out a formula so I am posting it here in hopes that some science major with a love of volume math post me a response that I have seen so wittingly posted on other forums. So I guess on if I need to produce 24kg per hour then I need to sustain a constant pressure guessing here of 17.7psi. I guess that much because hydrogen is 3 times a powerful as gasoline so that is a 3rd of what I need to produce per hour. The consumption of which gets into flow rates and other stuff that is over my head really. Oh I estimated my RPMs to be around 2500 - 3000 I know that info is needed.

So then I realize that ultimately the problem with hydrogen is really a Rate of Production problem more than it is anything else. Rate of production/ Rate of consumption = Unity or viability to do work. What is aimed at is Over Unity or a ratio above 1:2 this is the ultimate hydrogen goal. If you could do that on a consistent basis you could really go anywhere and do anything for free. You could drive all over the US for pennies literally. So in come the innovators those who have claimed overunity all of which have met with untimely deaths after being visited by the oil companies and government per se. You know how I love Conspiracy theories. I'm convinced that United flight 93 was shot out of the sky somewhere else because that golf divot that they showed on the news was no gigantic plane. I'm sorry there would have been much more than that and that was unofficially confirmed by someone in the intelligence community.
I however digress, so don't get me started on the pentagon. ANYWAY Muhammad if you will please.

Ok so collectively what do we know about hydrogen production and water? I'm not going to get into all of the beneficial ways to get hydrogen out of hydrocarbons or oxides or zinc or a million other chemicals because frankly I don't understand it. I will stick to the simple electromechanical ways of producing hydrogen.

First the Laws as we know them:

The mass of a substance produced at an electrode during electrolysis is directly proportional to the number of electrons (the quantity of electricity) transferred at that electrode.
The number of faradays of electric charge required to discharge one mole of substance at an electrode is equal to the number of "excess" elementary charges on that ion.
More expertly expressed by:

In modern form, Faraday's laws are summarised by:

$m \ = \ { QM \over zF }$

where

m is the mass of the substance produced at the electrode
Q is the total electric charge passed through the solution
z is the valence number of ions of the substance (electrons transferred per ion)
F = 96 485 C mol-1 is the Faraday constant
M is the molar mass of the substance

The total charge Q is the integral electric current I(t) over time t:

$Q = \int_0^T I(t) \ dt$

where T is the total amount of time of the electrolysis.

In the simple case of constant current electrolysis this reduces to:

Q = It

$n \ = \ { I t\over zF }$

where n is the amount of substance ("number of moles") produced.

Uggh math breathe breathe. Anyway that little snippet of math will tell us some neat things later. However it doesn't include something that I thought is of dire importance temperature.

So these are the building blocks of getting Hydrogen from electricity which I actually know a little something about, and so here starts my quest at getting hydrogen for my ICE. So I'm researching and researching and finding more and more neat little clues of how to get more hydrogen faster.

First off I will list everything by numbers and then give my hypothesis at the end of how to get on demand hydrogen for my ICE. I feel it is rather simple actually and some key elements have been overlooked. However people who don't know much actually think that way. I think it is a blessing because people who know it all or a little bit of something overlook the obvious, OFTEN.

1. We find that passing a relatively small amount of current can produce electrolysis. The separating of hydrogen from oxygen in water. (Yes there are other kinds of electrolysis but we are talking about this one).
2. We know that molecules are made up of two or more elements and are bonded together covalently or ionically (I suppose).
3. We know that mass at certain temperatures has certain characteristics. At higher temperatures it moves around more.
4. We know that lines of magnetism has its effect on matter some more than others.
5. We know that ICE engines are about 18-25% efficient the rest of their efficiency is lost primarily in heat or energy transfer from one direction to another.
6. We know that at 2500 C electrolysis happens instantaneously in a process known as thermolysis.
7. We know that ridiculously high voltage and current can atomize water.
8. We know that salt water can burn when exposed to radiation.
9. We know that hydroxy (HHO or Brown's Gas) can increase fuel efficiency.
10. We know that John Keely made claims that oscillating water at 42,800khz causes it to dissociate. This is unconfirmed but ultrasonic vibrations do cause water to vaporize commonly used in Fog Machines in concerts.
11. We know that the resonant frequency for hydrogen is 1,420,405,752 Hz. Presumably to effectively agitate hydrogen should probably be attempted at one of its harmonics. One of which would bring us close to John Keely's frequency -15th 43347.344 hz. If working on a harmonics theory it would be safe to say that the length of the conductor be brought into account. It is also said that John Keely's frequency was done in a cord. Therefore it would be safe to say that other frequencies should be taken into account which would be the resonant frequency of Oxygen (currently unknown to me) and either the resonance of the container of water or the resonance of the cathode/anode used to induce the frequency during electrolysis.
12. We know that transformers induce an emf on coils nearby and if the primary winding has less turns than the secondary the voltage will be increased on the secondary.
13. We know a man named Stan Meyer claims to have come up with a way to get 300% efficiency from cold hydrolysis.
14. We know that his design has been improved on by several people Dave Lawton being one of them.
15. We know that water molecules have certain ways of acting in water.
16. We know that HTE is more efficient than normal room temperature Electrolysis.
Now some of this stuff maybe hoax, some of it maybe ignorant guessing but either way it is the asking of the question "What if" that is at the core of true science. In science there are laws and laws are meant to be broken, so they say. Or at least they remain the same when all of the variables that made them laws are in place.

So here is my hypothesis: Since lighting off your vehicle on Hydroxy will undoubtedly not yield enough to run your car you can do the second best thing boost your octane with it. So I say you start your car like normal sucking down cups of gas, then you flip on your hydroxy unit. Your primary hydroxy unit first bubbles through a water bubbler to clear it and then through a fuel bubbler to mix with your engines fuel and effectively giving you a higher octane rating. Possibly having a second hydrolysis machine that performs hydrolysis on the fuel itself who knows but safely just water. That hydrogenized fuel is then fed into the car giving it an extra boost. The secondary hydrolysis unit is fed into the air intake to provide a richer mixture and allowing you to use less fuel. Then after the engine gets hot run pressurized water around the exhaust to collect the heat from there creating superheated water. Run this super heated water through an electrolysis process getting even more hydrogen and as hydrogen production increases with the heat from the engine hydroxy production becomes more and more efficient using less energy to create. The fuel hydroxy mixture can then be leaned out further and further so that less and less fuel is used because hydroxy gas will be so high and effectively increasing fuel efficiency to extremely acceptable levels and contributing to the overall efficiency of the engine.

This way you aren't really getting something for nothing you are just using that which is wasted, so you are in effect recycling energy rather than pulling it out of thin air. If you could reclaim 50% of the energy that is wasted it would effectively increase miles per gallon and my financial happiness.

I know it is a long post but hopefully a brainiac will come along and either agree with me or give me the necessary formulas so I can figure out what will possibly work and what won't.

#### 1 comment:

1. And after all that figuring, there's always the off chance that you'll start ur car and blow up! But it was a good read.....you surely are more mathly than I!