<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The latest &#8220;scientific breakthrough&#8221; scam &#8212; water gas</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/</link>
	<description>Ramblings by a former physics teacher teaching ESL in China</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:55:13 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dean Victor PhD</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48470</link>
		<dc:creator>Dean Victor PhD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:09:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48470</guid>
		<description>Water to energy

What everyone seems to forget when quoting thermal theory is that the H2O-HHO process is not creating energy, but using an existing source...water. Just as gasoline is converted to heat in a gasoline engine using less than 5 amp@12VDC, H2O is converted to HHO at 50amps@12VDC resulting in 3 ltrs/min of HHO which is injected into the engine as a supplement, not a primary source. I have a 2007 Dodge 3500 with a Commings 5.9 diesel engine that averaged 16.7 mpg over a 6 tank (100 gal)of fuel. After installing the fuel cell the Dodge and doing nothing more,it now average 24.2 mpg.  You can do all the chalk board and theoretic mental masterbation you want, but the proof is in actual application.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Water to energy</p>
<p>What everyone seems to forget when quoting thermal theory is that the H2O-HHO process is not creating energy, but using an existing source&#8230;water. Just as gasoline is converted to heat in a gasoline engine using less than 5 amp@12VDC, H2O is converted to HHO at 50amps@12VDC resulting in 3 ltrs/min of HHO which is injected into the engine as a supplement, not a primary source. I have a 2007 Dodge 3500 with a Commings 5.9 diesel engine that averaged 16.7 mpg over a 6 tank (100 gal)of fuel. After installing the fuel cell the Dodge and doing nothing more,it now average 24.2 mpg.  You can do all the chalk board and theoretic mental masterbation you want, but the proof is in actual application.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philip Sadler</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48449</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip Sadler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 02:29:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48449</guid>
		<description>As a physicist, I can say that the HHO claims are hogwash that only enrich the devious and fleecs the ignorant. What is being claimed here is that using electrical energy derived from a car's alternator, one can electrolyze water into HHO and then burn it. What those interested in this method do not understand is that it takes a huge amount of electricty to make HHO; the engine must work harder, i.e. use more gasoline to make HHO. The HHO burning produces less energy than the gasoline that was used to make it. Think of it t his way: why can't you use an electric motor to power an electric generator that will power the electric motor and get perpetual motion? It is because there are losses at each stage of the process. Just because one cannot see the electrical energy and one can see gasoline does not mean that splitting H2O into HHO is free. It is a question of thermodynamics, not a question of how hot HHO burns. Scams like this are a tax on the scientifically illiterate. Anyone who thinks that they are getting better mileage is making a mistake in long division. Save your $$$ and get a more efficient car.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a physicist, I can say that the HHO claims are hogwash that only enrich the devious and fleecs the ignorant. What is being claimed here is that using electrical energy derived from a car&#8217;s alternator, one can electrolyze water into HHO and then burn it. What those interested in this method do not understand is that it takes a huge amount of electricty to make HHO; the engine must work harder, i.e. use more gasoline to make HHO. The HHO burning produces less energy than the gasoline that was used to make it. Think of it t his way: why can&#8217;t you use an electric motor to power an electric generator that will power the electric motor and get perpetual motion? It is because there are losses at each stage of the process. Just because one cannot see the electrical energy and one can see gasoline does not mean that splitting H2O into HHO is free. It is a question of thermodynamics, not a question of how hot HHO burns. Scams like this are a tax on the scientifically illiterate. Anyone who thinks that they are getting better mileage is making a mistake in long division. Save your $$$ and get a more efficient car.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48438</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 23:41:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48438</guid>
		<description>There is only one explanation for this phenomenon that made sense to me....if it is true!

The claim by some HHO enthusiasts is that HHO allows a more efficient burn and the extra enegy comes not from some mysterious new law of physics but from unburned fuel that would in a unmodified Automobile not be converted to usable energy, ie. it goes out the tail pipe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is only one explanation for this phenomenon that made sense to me&#8230;.if it is true!</p>
<p>The claim by some HHO enthusiasts is that HHO allows a more efficient burn and the extra enegy comes not from some mysterious new law of physics but from unburned fuel that would in a unmodified Automobile not be converted to usable energy, ie. it goes out the tail pipe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eljefe</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48426</link>
		<dc:creator>eljefe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:14:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48426</guid>
		<description>Allen makes a good point here. One drawback to burning liquid fuel is the carbon deposits left behind. You know, all those Amoco ads touting their cleaner burning gas are not all snake oil. LNG cars have practically no carbon buildup, since the gas burns more completely than vaporized gasoline or diesel. (Gas and vapor are not the same thing, folks.) A car running solely on hydrogen or "HHO" would have no carbon buildup, since there's no carbon to begin with.

That said, we are far from having a national hydrogen infrastructure that would enable a hydrogen-burning car to travel much further than southern California, and I have yet to read or hear of anyone who has driven an HHO car cross-country solely on the gas mixture. If someone has, then let me know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Allen makes a good point here. One drawback to burning liquid fuel is the carbon deposits left behind. You know, all those Amoco ads touting their cleaner burning gas are not all snake oil. LNG cars have practically no carbon buildup, since the gas burns more completely than vaporized gasoline or diesel. (Gas and vapor are not the same thing, folks.) A car running solely on hydrogen or &#8220;HHO&#8221; would have no carbon buildup, since there&#8217;s no carbon to begin with.</p>
<p>That said, we are far from having a national hydrogen infrastructure that would enable a hydrogen-burning car to travel much further than southern California, and I have yet to read or hear of anyone who has driven an HHO car cross-country solely on the gas mixture. If someone has, then let me know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Allen</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48420</link>
		<dc:creator>Allen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 02:52:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48420</guid>
		<description>I am a professional car mechanic and had installed three different HHO Cell for my customers.
Cars that run gas (HHO or Natural Gas) has cleaner piston and cylinder comparing to cars that run petro! And easier to service when it comes to TUNE UPS!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a professional car mechanic and had installed three different HHO Cell for my customers.<br />
Cars that run gas (HHO or Natural Gas) has cleaner piston and cylinder comparing to cars that run petro! And easier to service when it comes to TUNE UPS!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48163</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2008 04:10:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48163</guid>
		<description>I can see all the angles being discussed.  My question is, if HHO gas is in the chamber making it burn the gas that is being injected more completely, isnt the O2 sensor see a leaner exhaust and case more fuel to be injected?  There are also plans and devices sold to "trick" the the computer in a vehical by working with the O2 sensor to prevent the extra gas being injected.  The real question is: wha are the effects on the valves and the plugs from the engine being ran lean because of the burn off of more gas in the cylinder?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can see all the angles being discussed.  My question is, if HHO gas is in the chamber making it burn the gas that is being injected more completely, isnt the O2 sensor see a leaner exhaust and case more fuel to be injected?  There are also plans and devices sold to &#8220;trick&#8221; the the computer in a vehical by working with the O2 sensor to prevent the extra gas being injected.  The real question is: wha are the effects on the valves and the plugs from the engine being ran lean because of the burn off of more gas in the cylinder?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eljefe</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48114</link>
		<dc:creator>eljefe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 07:11:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48114</guid>
		<description>My point, SpeedTrap47, is you can't get something for nothing. Sure, running your lights has a negligible effect on your RPMs. The alternator-battery combination provides plenty of power to run all the electrics without slowing the engine down hardly at all. But, the energy to light the lights, etc., has to come ultimately from the engine and its fuel supply. The alternator produces no power unless it's rotating. The pulley system provides enough mechanical advantage that turning the alternator is a piece of cake for the engine, as you point out. Still, the energy required to do that work comes from the engine burning fuel.

Ditto creating your hydrogen to squirt into the combustion mixture. That energy ultimately comes from the engine. Now I confess I do not know the answer to this question: is the energy loss offset by an increase in gas mileage? In other words, if the engine needs to burn a little bit more fuel to electrolyse the water, in the end does the car actually go farther on a gallon of gas? At this point, I am not entirely convinced that using hydrogen (or "HHO," which is the actual topic of this post) makes that dramatic a difference in mileage. There are plenty of scams out there, and my post was to caution people expecting HHO or hydrogen to be some sort of miracle "free" energy source. TANSTAAFL.

For my money, I'd switch to a diesel car and burn used vegetable frying oil. That seems to be a more reliable, and safer, technology than messing around with hydrogen and oxygen mixtures.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My point, SpeedTrap47, is you can&#8217;t get something for nothing. Sure, running your lights has a negligible effect on your RPMs. The alternator-battery combination provides plenty of power to run all the electrics without slowing the engine down hardly at all. But, the energy to light the lights, etc., has to come ultimately from the engine and its fuel supply. The alternator produces no power unless it&#8217;s rotating. The pulley system provides enough mechanical advantage that turning the alternator is a piece of cake for the engine, as you point out. Still, the energy required to do that work comes from the engine burning fuel.</p>
<p>Ditto creating your hydrogen to squirt into the combustion mixture. That energy ultimately comes from the engine. Now I confess I do not know the answer to this question: is the energy loss offset by an increase in gas mileage? In other words, if the engine needs to burn a little bit more fuel to electrolyse the water, in the end does the car actually go farther on a gallon of gas? At this point, I am not entirely convinced that using hydrogen (or &#8220;HHO,&#8221; which is the actual topic of this post) makes that dramatic a difference in mileage. There are plenty of scams out there, and my post was to caution people expecting HHO or hydrogen to be some sort of miracle &#8220;free&#8221; energy source. TANSTAAFL.</p>
<p>For my money, I&#8217;d switch to a diesel car and burn used vegetable frying oil. That seems to be a more reliable, and safer, technology than messing around with hydrogen and oxygen mixtures.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SpeedTrap47</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48054</link>
		<dc:creator>SpeedTrap47</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 02:06:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48054</guid>
		<description>"After seeing a hho welder in operation how can you say that this tech is a scam. Electrolysis is on demand and not stored. Perfectly safe. It uses very little electricity to make hho on a car from what I understand. This is going to be way big!"

BECAUSE it actually produces a CRAPPY brittle weld
http://www.phact.org/e/bgas.htm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;After seeing a hho welder in operation how can you say that this tech is a scam. Electrolysis is on demand and not stored. Perfectly safe. It uses very little electricity to make hho on a car from what I understand. This is going to be way big!&#8221;</p>
<p>BECAUSE it actually produces a CRAPPY brittle weld<br />
<a href="http://www.phact.org/e/bgas.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.phact.org/e/bgas.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SpeedTrap47</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48052</link>
		<dc:creator>SpeedTrap47</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 02:01:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48052</guid>
		<description>This is so wrong I wouldn't quit my day job if I were you


Now the alternator only produces what the car and its electronics demand at any given moment. It is CAPABLE of producing in the range of 80A on some vehicles and heavy duty ones can produce up to 120A. Putting an extra load on the alternator by running an HHO generator @ 20A will have almost NO negative effect of reduced gas mileage. Have you noticed any decrease in mileage just because you run with your headlights on? They draw 20-30A when on. The air conditioner doesnt draw power from the alternator. It creates “drag” on the engine by engaging a mechanical clutch connected to a pump. Yes, the ac compressor is just a pump, it siphons mechanical enery, not electrical. Only the fan that blows the air out of your ducts draws any electrical energy. Try this. Start your car. Turn on your lights. No RPM change. Now turn on the wipers. Still no change. Turn on the radio. No change. Turn on the fan(not the AC, just the fan). Again

no change in engine load that would require the engine to work harder. Turn on every electrical thing in your car and all you are doing is drawing on a

RESERVE of electrical energy already being produced by the alternator.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is so wrong I wouldn&#8217;t quit my day job if I were you</p>
<p>Now the alternator only produces what the car and its electronics demand at any given moment. It is CAPABLE of producing in the range of 80A on some vehicles and heavy duty ones can produce up to 120A. Putting an extra load on the alternator by running an HHO generator @ 20A will have almost NO negative effect of reduced gas mileage. Have you noticed any decrease in mileage just because you run with your headlights on? They draw 20-30A when on. The air conditioner doesnt draw power from the alternator. It creates “drag” on the engine by engaging a mechanical clutch connected to a pump. Yes, the ac compressor is just a pump, it siphons mechanical enery, not electrical. Only the fan that blows the air out of your ducts draws any electrical energy. Try this. Start your car. Turn on your lights. No RPM change. Now turn on the wipers. Still no change. Turn on the radio. No change. Turn on the fan(not the AC, just the fan). Again</p>
<p>no change in engine load that would require the engine to work harder. Turn on every electrical thing in your car and all you are doing is drawing on a</p>
<p>RESERVE of electrical energy already being produced by the alternator.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SpeedTrap47</title>
		<link>http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48051</link>
		<dc:creator>SpeedTrap47</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 01:56:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computernewbie.info/wheatdogg/2006/07/14/the-latest-scientific-breakthrough-scam-water-gas/#comment-48051</guid>
		<description>NO ones been killed 
All the patents are public knowledge available to ANYONE
Patents are in force for 20 YEARS
If no one can make money from it THAT should give you a CLUE</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NO ones been killed<br />
All the patents are public knowledge available to ANYONE<br />
Patents are in force for 20 YEARS<br />
If no one can make money from it THAT should give you a CLUE</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
