Hydrogen in Diesel

While picking up parts today , I saw an 18 wheeler with advertisements all over it..It boils down to a way of running Hydrogen in a diesel engine for trucks and equipment..How much we gonna save there by time we buy and install this system on our trucks.?? I forget the name on the trailer, but I'll bet there's a website for it...

If there is a way to inject it into a diesel it will burn it. How to make it feasible/cost effective is another issue.

The systems make hydrogen to mix with intake air. The hope is to improve mpg. It should work, but it will take a while to work all the bugs out.
My friend has a hydrogen system on his car for a few months. It is still experimental

Try water4gas.com. There is a 37 page dissertation and ad for this product along with how to and other drawings. Quite interesting. A friend of mine in the autoparts business has been experimenting with his and say he has seen a slight improvement in MPG. However, his system is less than basic. He is improving it now after reading water4gas.com. NUff said Henry

Where does the energy to produce the hydrogen come from?
This makes about as much sense as connecting a motor shaft to a shaft generator then supplying the motor from the generator.
How many people on this site actually passed high school math & physics? Or heard of the 1st, 2nd & 3rd laws of thermodynamics.
Beware of snake oil peddlers.
The local dopes running the Grey-Bruce Health Care system in Ontario. They not only bought hydrogen generators for the ambulances. They also purchased "magnetic ionizers" to clamp around the natural gas lines supplying the hospital"s boilers.

With all due respect for what we call our Laws Of Thermodynamics, let's try to remember our history is littered with "Laws" that turned out to be incomplete...remember the experts who said rail travel faster than horses could run would drive passengers insane, and that flying from the US to Europe non-stop (or to the moon) was impossible...
The question to ask is not how crazy the health care people are, but whether they found any improvements...if there're no improvements, that's the time to call them crazy...

A friend of mine is fooling with the jars that generate hydrogen, by electrolysis.. They have already had one minor BOOM, fortunately, no one was hurt..I fear that they will not be so lucky the next time..

As Buickanddeere indicate the making of hydrogen fuel requires the unmaking of hydrogen ash. (we call it water) To have hydrogen to burn forces two atoms of it to be stripped from an oxygen atom. This requires breaking a pair of covalent bonds. (the creation of which was the energy derived from burning the hydrogen in the first place). The "free lunch" in this case uses electricity from the alternator to drive the hydrogen generator. That is a energy drag way beyond the energy derived from the combustion of the hydrogen introduced into the engine.
If anyone claims fuel economy improvements, they keep poor records, and are also affected by their intent to have it help. This causes changes in driving habits that do change milage.
When we drive vehicles, we use the hydrogen in the hydrocarbon to make energy (not any where as much as from the carbon, but substantial). For every 5 gallons of fuel we burn, we produce about a gallon of new water. That is the cold morning vapor coming out of the tail pipe. It is all a sourcing problem. JimN

Sounds like you failed or skipped high school math, physics and have no clue to what the 3 laws of thermodynamics are.

I see a lot of negitive comments on this topic. a few of you seem to be forgeting it takes time to develope something. A person did not go and get milk from a cow the first time without being kicked or the animal running away. Or the first engine did not work with out trials and errors. Things happen. Sometimes its good, other times it takes a life or a few. Remember no one would be here if things did not go wrong.

If you think you can do it better then you try, remember to use caution at all times.

I was told in my science class back in high school to treat every chemical experiment as if it were to kill you.

The key will be to find a source of energy for producing the hydrogen that does not impair the propulsion of the vehicle. Two come to mind- some sort of brakes that generate electricity when they slow the vehicle down, and solar cells that generate electricity for the electrolysis when they can. The sunnier it is, the better you're mileage.

Look, all the warm and fuzzy platitudes aside about try, try again etc might inspire people but not machines.
There are some things that all the trying and best wishes won"t accomplish. Do you not get it?
Think this one all the way through. Does any machine operate at 100% efficiency? For example if this hydrogen generator made enough H2 gas to make 10 crankshaft HP. An internal combustion engine runs at 30-40% efficiency. So it would take 30HP worth of hydrogen gas to make 10 crankshaft HP. 10HP of the hydrogen energy goes out the tailpipe as heat. Another 10HP of the hydrogen"s energy goes out the cooling system.
The hydrogen generator if working at 67% efficiency would require 45HP of energy in from the alternator. To obtain 45HP from the alternator, it requires at least 55HP input from the crankshaft.
So just where and how aside from wishful thinking. How can you gain anything by using 55HP from the engine to make 10HP worth of HP? You are running a 45 HP loss. It"s taking 5.5 units of energy to obtain 1 unit of energy. That"s the wrong way around, that"s called a loss.
Are you thinking with emotion or logic.
If perpetual motion machines worked? Why are there none out there giving us free energy?
The odds of obtaining efficiency gains from a hydrogen generator added to a vehicle. Is the same odds of striking a mother load of gold ore while forking out a horse stable.

Oh, for God"s sake lighten up a little, before you have an apoplectic stroke...if you"ll just think--calmly--for a minute, you"ll recall our history is a litany of things the "experts" (professionals, scientists, the "foremost minds" of the times) said was impossible, at least until someone accomplished "the impossible".
If someone says they"ve done the "impossible", fine, let them spend their own money to demonstrate it. If it works, we can always revise our "immutable laws".
Get a copy of "The Experts Speak" out of the library; it"s hilarious--or maybe tragic.

I don"t like seeing people either being taken in with snake oil salesmen. Or people wasting their time on the impossible.
Do you believe it"s possible to take a 45 gallon barrel of water. Remove 5 gallons, add 2 gallons, remove 5 gallons etc. And never have the water barrel go empty?
If you won"t believe me and want to cling to high ideals, great wishes and fantasy. Go on thinking warm thoughts as you walk through a blizzard in your underwear. The warm thoughts will keep your body temp up just as well as the H2 generator will improve mileage.
Try out the systems if you don"t believe me in a situation where the results can"t be slanted with careful driving or down right trickery.
Until you can start breaking the laws of physics. Any of these perpetual motion devices will not work.
Yes I know how much you want to really believe otherwise that somebody can do the impossible. But like my 10 year old daughter, she isn"t getting a horse either.
You can"t wish the impossible to be true. And as Albert Eisenstein said " the example of foolishness is repeating the same action over and over again. While expecting a different result.
Some people will let emotion out weigh logic.
What part of the numbers in my previous example do you not understand?

B&D: You"re missing my point completely--we don"t have any argument about present knowledge---what we"re disagreeing on is whether present knowledge is all there is to know, that nothing can happen outside our present knowledge because we know, now, everything there is to know...send an email so we don"t clutter the forum
Bud [email protected]

In the energy business the large easy gains have been made. The "low hanging fruit" has already been picked.
Perpetual motion machines will neevr work.
New or improved energy sources are limited as are energy storage devices.
Cold fussion is not possible. Zero point energy sources are science fiction. Hydrogen fussion is possible but is expensive and suffers from low efficiency.
To make a tiny fraction of "Star Trek" or "Terminator" technology work. It would require room temperature super conductors, ultra pure metals and the equipment would be large bulky and cost trillions of dollars.

That's our disagreement: that certain things are impossible, period, end of discussion!!
At one time, flying across the Atlantic, or sending pictures through the air, were impossible, period.
What the "experts" were really saying was that they were impossible at the then state of knowledge, but they were closing their minds to the fact that knowledge grows, giving us planes to London and TV.
I'm not specifically talking about the hydrogen miracle mileage rig, or cold fusion, but about the mindset that says something is impossible, that anyone who works on it is therefor a con man or hopelessly off base. In many cases they will be, but our history is full of people who "did the impossible".