3
   

Device improves internal combustion efficiency 97%

 
 
DrewDad
 
Reply Mon 19 Sep, 2005 02:10 pm
Can this man save the world? Everyone wants to cut car emissions. Sooner or later, someone will find a way to do it. Joe Williams hopes it's him.

Joe Williams Sr. believes he has the machine that will help save the world. It will make the sky blue, allow everyone to breathe easier, and, in a time of skyrocketing fuel prices, save us all money.

Yes, it's hard to believe. Williams is a Winnipeg boy who cut his business teeth managing McDonald's and Burger King franchises. Even now, he employs only 15 people in his Toronto and Manitoba offices. He entered this save-the-world field only 11 years ago and has invested just $7.5 million in his product.

But before you sniff skeptically and skip to the next story, read on.

Because if Joe Williams turns out to be right, "I think Bill Gates and our group will be shaking hands," he says. "It's that big."

"It" is his Hydrogen Generating Module, or H2N-Gen for short.

Smaller than a DVD player - small enough to sit comfortably under the hood of any truck or car - it could be big enough to solve the world's greenhouse gas emission problems, at least for the near future. In fact, it could make the Kyoto protocol obsolete. Basically, the H2N-Gen contains a small reservoir of distilled water and other chemicals such as potassium hydroxide. A current is run from the car battery through the liquid. This process of electrolysis creates hydrogen and oxygen gases which are then fed into the engine's intake manifold where they mix with the gasoline vapours.

It's a scientific fact that adding hydrogen to a combustion chamber will cause a cleaner burn. The challenge has always been to find a way to get the hydrogen gas into the combustion chamber in a safe, reliable and cost-effective way.

Williams claims he has achieved this with his H2N-Gen. His product, he said, produces a more complete burn, greatly increasing efficiency and reducing fuel consumption by 10 to 40 per cent - and pollutants by up to 100 per cent.

Most internal combustion engines operate at about 35 per cent efficiency. This means that only 35 per cent of the fuel is fully burned. The rest either turns to carbon corroding the engine or goes out the exhaust pipe as greenhouse gases.

The H2N-Gen increases burn efficiency to at least 97 per cent, Williams said. This saves fuel and greatly reduces emissions.

It also means less engine maintenance and oil changes. The only thing the vehicle owner has to do is refill the unit with distilled water once every 80 hours of engine use.

Tests show the unit itself should lasts for at least 10 years, Williams said.

It can be attached to any kind of internal combustion engine: diesel, gasoline, propane/natural gas.

Also, because the H2N-Gen manufactures only enough hydrogen to feed the engine at a given time, there is no dangerous onboard storage of hydrogen gas and no hydrogen under pressure.

Williams said his product, if it works as well as he claims, will serve as a bridge between the present and the time when the combustion engine is relegated to the scrap heap of history. The preferred interim solution has been gasoline-electric hybrid cars, which remain expensive.

But Williams doesn't want you to take just his word for it.

(More if you follow the link.)
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 3 • Views: 8,229 • Replies: 38
No top replies

 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Sep, 2005 04:49 pm
I think Mr Williams should stand at the next election.That way his ideas will be scrutinised and evaluated according to the principles of democratic socialism.
0 Replies
 
kho
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Sep, 2005 04:58 pm
hmm very interesting, it's simple but yet ingenious,
can't wait to see this device working!!
0 Replies
 
AliceInWonderland
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2005 03:46 pm
Just wanted to point out that you can't make an internal combustion engine 97% efficient, not on this planet. The best theoretical efficiency you can get is 59%. When the article talks about 35% efficiency, it's the overall efficiency of the engine - how much work you get out of the engine. The other 65% is heat plus incomplete combustion. The 97% is talking about combustion efficiency only, NOT work, so the actual efficiency improvement for the engine would not be as high as the article makes it appear. I'm not discounting the invention - 10% increase in fuel economy with reduced emissions would certainly be welcome.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2005 04:07 pm
Sounds likely Alice - maybe they meant 97% of your 59%?
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2005 04:49 pm
saw this on the news recently :
an attachment to the truck exhaust pipe redirects the exhaust gases - after some cleaning process - back into the engine. the claim is that quite a bit of energy is lost out the tailpipe and that this device recovers some of that lost energy. it will improve fuel consumption by about 15% and greatly reduce exhaust pollution . apparently it's already in use. hbg
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2005 04:54 pm
"Joe Williams Sr. believes he has the machine that will help save the world."

Got as far as this before giving my considered opinion that Joe Williams Snr is an idiot.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2005 05:09 pm
It's all a fancy version of 10% off and buy one and get one free.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2005 05:15 pm
got a little further this time and agree

""snake oil salesman.""

fraudster
charlatan
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2005 05:24 pm
BTW, This is a gearhead version of the old Miller Urey experiment that took the primordial atmosphere and generated amino acids.
0 Replies
 
vinsan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2005 06:03 am
duh!
hydrogen combustion engines also emit green house gases ... u know which? Water Vapor.... thats why humid and damp air turns warm once it is heated and keeps the energy trapped for longer time as water vapor's specific heat content in more than that of water....

the heat contained in water vapor does not change (lower down) so easily...
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2005 06:43 am
someone at a2k really should tell Toyota or General Motors about this
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2005 07:20 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
got a little further this time and agree

""snake oil salesman.""

fraudster
charlatan

The article claims that it's been independently verified.



While fuel economy is slightly improved, it seems the major benefit is in emissions. The continuation of the article claims this guy wants to make his money by getting the CO2 credits and selling them on the international market.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2005 08:13 am
"While fuel economy is slightly improved"

how does that square with the title of this thread?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2005 08:21 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
"While fuel economy is slightly improved"

how does that square with the title of this thread?


Quote:
Most internal combustion engines operate at about 35 per cent efficiency. This means that only 35 per cent of the fuel is fully burned. The rest either turns to carbon corroding the engine or goes out the exhaust pipe as greenhouse gases.

The H2N-Gen increases burn efficiency to at least 97 per cent, Williams said. This saves fuel and greatly reduces emissions.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2005 09:33 am
All this device does is improve the burning of fuel in the engine. It does not improve the efficiency of an internal combustion engine to 97% or anything like it, as Alice has pointed out.

The device has been evaluted, but by people who have an interest in selling it, hardly independent. The Gazette's casual testing was admitted to being of doubtful value.

It draws power from the engine to electrolyse water and feed the gases back into the manifold. It might save some fuel, but it will not cut down on carbon dioxide emissions, and compared with a catalytic converter, it's expensive and potentially hazardous.

My immediate reaction on seeing the 97% claim was that it must be a scam. It may not be a scam, but its not going to save the world, make the Kyoto Treaty redundant, clean up the atmosphere and make Williams the richest man on the planet either.
0 Replies
 
abe lincoln78
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Oct, 2005 08:08 am
Hey, guys, I just read something you guys put in here about the maximum theoretical efficiency of a gasoline reciprocating motor to be in the 50 some odd percent area. That estimate is somewhere in the 200 some odd percent wrong category!

The maximum theoretical thermal efficiency of a gasoline reciprocating motor is in the ballpark of 17%. Your Chevy Suburban is actually probably closer to 5% efficient! I know you guys mentioned burn efficiency, but thermal efficiency is the holy grail we are after kids, not solely burn efficiency. If you want to increase your actual thermal efficiency, you need to raise the compression ratio of your engine, but you must remember that in a gasoline engine you are realistically limited to a 10-1 compression ratio.

That is why diesel engines are significantly more efficient than gasoline engines.... higher compression.

Heres a fun fact... the most efficient gas turbine power plant in the world uses a GE gas turbine that is in the ballpark of 60% efficient. This is achieved through the high efficiency abilities of giant turbine engines coupled with steam generators heated by the exhaust.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Oct, 2005 02:49 pm
Which is why hybrid engines work well; they use batteries for high-demand (accelerating) and turbines for cruising.

But this is addressing the legacy fleets.

Still don't know if it will work as advertised, but it would be cool if it does....
0 Replies
 
AliceInWonderland
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 08:16 am
Quote:
Hey, guys, I just read something you guys put in here about the maximum theoretical efficiency of a gasoline reciprocating motor to be in the 50 some odd percent area. That estimate is somewhere in the 200 some odd percent wrong category!


THEORETICAL max efficiency for internal combustion engine is 65%. This assumes complete combusion, etc. Wasn't implying we could get there, just making a comparison between the maximum possible vs. the claim of the article of 97%.

Also, on hybrid engines, although they sound good, unless you drive a lot and gas prices double from what they are now, the economic pay-off for most people just isn't there. In addition, the pollution numbers on those cars neglect the battery disposal/replacement every 7 - 8 years.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 10:44 am
"In addition, the pollution numbers on those cars neglect the battery disposal/replacement every 7 - 8 years."

very good point Alice.

The solution of course is fuel cell/hydrogen. But there are two major problems.

Hydrogen must be from clean/renewable sources.
Hydrogen fuel storage in a car.

We are a long way from both at the moment....but watch this space as they say.

More oil wars will buy time.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Device improves internal combustion efficiency 97%
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 08:21:52