Water on the brain

Pieter de Bruin, of 1* P***** Avenue, Ceres, may well be dead. If not, I munged his address because I fear for his safety. Big Oil will surely get him. His only hope of survival is to let them buy his silence with a few billion dollars, but he will have to live in the lap of luxury knowing the price is depriving thousands of ordinary South Africans not only of a money making opportunity, but also of a real chance to save the planet from imminent carbon doom.

Same bakkie, different signage todayWhile sitting in the dark, caused by an acute attack of global warming, I perused by candlelight an advertisement De Bruin placed in the latest issue of Popular Mechanics. This magazine has always been a rich source of entertainment, and De Bruin’s ad is a classic: alongside a photo of a bakkie with lots of signage, such as “test vehicle” added in Microsoft Paint, he’s flogging something he calls HHO. The letters stand for hydrogen, hydrogen and oxygen, and represent a “fuel saving technology”.

“This technology does not mean we are running on water, but introducing HHO, which simply and effectively creates the effect of using the same fuel in a more economical way. It supplements and CORRECTS the behaviour of fuel,” the advert claims, directing readers to a remarkably amateurish and painfully illiterate website at HHO4fuel.co.za.

Whoever wrote the copy didn’t actually read the website themselves, since it says quite clearly: “HHO = Oxyhydrogen = H2O = Water”

This, of course, is not true. Anyone who studied chemistry at school will know that there’s no way two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom will form a stable bond other than in the form it takes in water, and there’s no way that could be written other than H2O, or HOH, at a push, because a hydrogen atom in the middle wouldn’t care much for the oxygen on its right once it had bonded with another hydrogen atom on its left. So what’s going on here?

Surprisingly, the notion is not entirely weird, though it does attract every shade of crackpot under the sun. It is also not new.

De Bruin (”the Brown”, in Dutch) is talking about Brown’s gas, which is simply a mixture of hydrogen (H2) and oxygen (O2). Water can be split into these molecular gases by electrolysis. Hydrogen is a flammable gas, and as such can be used as fuel. Hydrogen-powered cars are nothing new either. You’d make a lot more money if you can solve the high-pressure storage problem, or the high-volume distribution problem. You’d make a right fortune if you can figure out a way to produce hydrogen gas using less energy than just burning regular unleaded.

Blowtorches using “oxyhydrogen” or “oxy-gas” have been in use since Yull Brown (of Brown’s gas fame) patented it in the late 1970s. They use either a bottle of each gas, or an electrolysis unit plugged into the electricity mains. Research papers from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (such as this 1974 paper and this one from 1976) describe how adding hydrogen to the fuel mixture of a car allows the engine to run leaner that it otherwise would. It stands to reason that a leaner-running engine might save fuel, provided its power output doesn’t drop by the same amount.

Of course the energy required to generate the hydrogen is a bit of a problem. It takes a lot of electricity to generate separately. De Bruin’s device electrolyses the water on board, and instead of running the engine on hydrogen, merely adds a little to the fuel or air inlet. So as not to bog your engine down with generating the power for this process, one shouldn’t expect a lot of hydrogen to be generated, so your fuel saving will probably be modest, and don’t expect to keep your warranty intact.

Though elaborately presented in fashionable magenta with lots of exclamation marks, De Bruin is only marginally more honest than other purveyors of this hyped stuff. He doesn’t claim 50% fuel savings, he claims 30%. He doesn’t have to explain why, if his car can run 100 miles on four ounces of water, he needs a hybrid engine, nor does he claim that an oxy-gas torch is a new invention and that its 2 000°C flame doesn’t feel very hot. All of these far-fetched claims are made by Denny Klein, of Hydrogen Technology Applications, who promptly hijacked Brown’s gas, renamed it Klein’s gas, and patented a trivial variation of a decades-old, perfectly obvious and previously patented process for generating the gas by electrolysis. A gullible television insert that includes the claims he makes can be seen here.

Not only the popular media, but fairly respectable science publications are taken in by the idea of running a car on water. Witness New Scientist, for example, claiming that, “Before long, you might be able to run your car with nothing more than water in its fuel tank. It would be the ultimate zero-emissions vehicle.”

Nothing more, in this case, except for 18kg of boron. The water is “reacted with” the boron, to produce the hydrogen on which the engine runs. This just happens to turns the boron into boron oxide, which needs to be reprocessed — using energy — in order to be used again as boron. So in reality, boron is the primary fuel, producing hydrogen and boron oxide, hydrogen is the secondary fuel or energy carrier, and water isn’t a fuel at all. The entire process is marginally less efficient than Freddy Flintstone’s ultimate zero-emissions vehicle. And even the Flintstone ZEV isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Contrary to the Flintstone Incorporated press release, it emits methane, which is a dangerous greenhouse gas — though admittedly a far less significant greenhouse gas than H2O.

Either way, if De Bruin is still alive, he is in mortal danger. Doesn’t everyone know that when Big Oil fails to convince alternative fuel inventors to sell the patents to them for billions, instead of selling them for billions to car manufacturers, they send round the cleaners? There’s this guy, Stanley Meyer, who invented an HHO driven car. He figured out how to make it more efficient that the Flintstone ZEV, using a revolutionary fuel cell. First, the courts called him a fraud. Who controls the courts? You guessed it. And now he’s dead. Coincidence? Of course not. Another inventor died in prison. Another fell down stairs and broke his neck. Who built those stairs? Right. Who writes the building codes? Don’t you know it. Another guy mysteriously died of old age. I’m not kidding. These people are dangerous.

Yours for R1 000! It’s very good bicarb, though.While De Bruin sells his $100 kits, he had better hope the men in dark glasses think Ceres is like Oros: not 100% real. After all, the water-fuelled car, discussed in whispered tones only on secret underground websites, are suppressed by the vast right wing conspiracy and the very same fossil fuel companies who blew up the twin towers and tried to make Jesus kill the Romans.

But there’s still time to accept the billion dollars from the Arabs that the late Stanley Meyer so foolishly turned down.

Like it? Please spike it: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • muti
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • Fark
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • TailRank
  • SphereIt
Similar spikes:

10 comments so far

  1. Pieter de Bruin April 26, 2008 10:41

    Hi
    I am Pieter de Bruin in this article. The person that wrote the article never contacted me, or looked or asked to produce our results. He or any one is welkome to contact me, to proof that I am still alived but most of all that this technology works. Author of this misleading article, please contact me.

  2. Ido Welles June 19, 2008 22:39

    My, but you are vicious and quite a sceptic. Mnr. Brown will prove you wrong yet .. just wait and see.

  3. johnandrews52 June 20, 2008 12:20

    Can we run our car with water and gas?
    Can anybody tell me is the HHO Gas is real working or is another scam?

  4. ronaldcollins June 21, 2008 6:52

    hi there, I use water to fuel a car as a supplement to gasoline. In fact, very little water is needed, only one quart of water provides over 1800 gallons of HHO gas which can literally last for months and significantly increase your car fuel efficiently, improve emissions quality, and save money. I found the way through this site http://www.runcarsonwater.us i really recommend it to everybody, it’s a nice ebook where you can find the instructions on how to do it! take a look.

  5. Ivo Vegter June 22, 2008 11:22

    @johnandrews52: As I explained, there’s no such thing as HHO gas. There’s hydrogen and there’s oxygen, which burn to produce water. There is an element of truth to this scheme, as detailed in the documents to which I linked, but burning hydrogen, or using it as a fuel additive, is neither as new nor as revolutionary as proponents would have you believe. It simply isn’t (yet) very efficient or reliable. If it were, car manufacturers would be all over it, and make billions, not only by improving the average fuel economy of their product range to meet government standards, but also because cars that perform well while using less fuel are very profitable. (Insert your favourite oil company plot here to explain why this doesn’t happen, and why this stuff is sold only by lunatic fringe websites.)

  6. manny July 13, 2008 20:49

    -hi there.
    to all that do not whant use hho in they cars,well
    let them pay over R10 a litter for the juice.
    I can say hho it works!!! whant prove? phone Carl
    @0826539999, he has a dodge 2L diesel, ans a x5 bmw,isuzu 2.5 diesel, he can tell and show to any one that whant to see it.
    regards
    manny

  7. Sick and Tired July 15, 2008 2:41

    I mean come on? Can’t you do better than that? Not only are you spamming a thread whose poster actually seems to understand what he’s talking about, you really can’t even be bothered TO FUCKING LEARN HOW TO FUCKING SPELL? I mean, really? You really think I’m going to see

    “I can say hho it works!!! whant prove? phone Carl
    @0826539999, he has a dodge 2L diesel, ans a x5 bmw,isuzu 2.5 diesel, he can tell and show to any one that whant to see it.”

    Posted somewhere and not think you’re a total fucking retard? I get like ten emails a day telling me i can “zoMg run youre CaR on water? Think not true! It real possible!!!1″ I mean goddamn, at least fucking try to sound like you’re not completely bullshitting me.

    Your entire fucking website is one long review of how well something works but you obviously can’t even speak English, which by the way IS THE LANGUAGE YOU’RE WRITING YOUR ADVERTISEMENT IN. Furthermore, who the fuck ARE you? Why should anything you say be believable, when the best support for any statement you make is “Trust me” “Take it from me” “Dont believes me? Aks Jerry, live in Kansas he has Ford truclk that can goe 48365037465973495 miles on one drop of water, no gas. and YOIU CAN TOO!!1 ASK ME HOW”

    wow, i really needed to say that

  8. Sick and Tired July 15, 2008 2:46

    BTW, Ivo great article, its thus far the only glimmer of sanity I can find when I google “car runs on water” AND “not true”

    pls keep up the good work

  9. Ido Welles September 2, 2008 22:28

    There really are some sceptics around here. HHO, now copyrighted in the U.S.A. , also commonly referred to as hyroxy gas is not a myth. And, yes it is possible to achieve some improvement in fuel economy.

    What these guys don’t tell you is that hydroxyl production does not vary with engine speed, but tends to be constant. Fine for stationery engines as I can attest but with some drawbacks. The technology really is beyond the ability of your everyday person. You really need to be a master mechanic to have a chance of making it work.

    Firstly you must be able to reset at least 3 variables;

    1. the ability to retard engine timing
    2. the ability to alter fuel injection rates or carburettor fuel rates
    3. and by implication, the ability to fool various anti-pollution sensors if they are present

    because if you can’t you may well get ultra lean conditions resulting in increased combustion chamber temperatures in petrol engines. Diesel engines are somewhat simpler to cater for. To set this up one really needs access to a rolling road or dynamometer.

    Where I’ve had some success is with an elderly constant speed standby electrical generator. After much fiddling a 20% improvement was achieved and, surprisingly enough, less is more; at 0.7 litres per minute of gas generation 20% improvement; at 2.0 litres per minute of gas generation 10% decrease in fuel consumption. By the way I have spent countless hours on research and experimentation and I would never put a unit on my very sophisticated French car. I don’t have the balls to try as a mistake could prove very costly.

  10. Johan October 6, 2008 9:32

    When all is said and done, I installed a 2 cell Hydrogen electrolizer in my 2004 Jeep Cherokee 2.8 CRD and save 20,5% diesel on average (Hi-way and city). Best saving is between 40 and 120 kmh. This is my own experience and results and I am happy with this saving. Personally I think this technology works and will impove over time.

Leave a comment

Please be polite and on topic. Your e-mail is needed to help verify you are not a spam-bot, and rarely if I need to contact you privately. It will never be published, abused or disclosed to anyone.

Please be aware that first-time commenters, as determined by your name and e-mail, are moderated. This unconscionable attack on your freedom of speech is regrettable, but since it helps combat the spam flood, it is non-negotiable. Please do not submit your comment twice. It will appear as soon as I see it in the moderation queue.