I agree with you.

The way this contraption is working is probably on the method using Oxyhydrogen - HHO gas (Brown gas) - the practical application of this method was discovered by the bulgarian named Ilya Vulkov (later changed his name to Yull Brown). Also to my knowledge there were earlier experiments by William A. Rhodes as well. There is a bit of controversy of "who did it first" but that's not all that important, what is more important is that you mostly likely never heard anything about this guys today and they are probably the pioneers of future energy.

This is not a myth - you can use water for fuel.

Brown gas can be used to sublimate refractory material like wolfram (going from solid straight to vapor state!), and even weld together sand with metal or wood with metal! It can be used to speed up the decomposition of radioactive materials. The gas changes it's heat voluntarily depending on the material it's being heated - if you move it over your hand it wont burn you! That's why they call it intelligent gas. This gas finds practically universal usage in the industry and can be used in automobiles and even as a heating source for your home. The applications are a lot. And all that just using water and electricity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqjn3mup1So

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xHvEsUv0wg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-dca5fVLTM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIeVx5wb8u0

No.

Oil rigs are financially viable because the world is a piggy bank stuffed full of money(energy). They reach down and pick up the money that's just hanging out down there. The process that the article badly represents requires more energy to make the fuel than the fuel then produces. It cannot be efficiently used to transition from drilled oil.

The real value in this process, as has already been said several times, is in allowing certain small, specially-designed systems to become highly energy-independent. Think of it as a new way to make very expensive batteries, and you'll be pretty much spot-on.

There has maybe been more baloney written about "Brown gas" than any other water-to-fuel fraud.

No, this process is nothing to do with Brown gas. Brown gas is hydrogen and oxygen produced by electrolysis of water. The invention being discussed here produces long-chain hydrocarbons.

Attempts to commercialize Brown gas have been failures for any or all of the following reasons:

1. There is not an efficient and safe way to store or deliver hydrogen as a fuel. Not in automobiles, not in your home, not in carrier jets, nowhere.

2. There is always a greater amount of energy required to generate Brown gas than can be delivered by its combustion.

3. Every attempt to claim that Brown gas is useful for anything much more than welding is in fact a fraud.

Next some credulous person will claim that magnecules have been unjustly ignored as an energy source.

Wow. How had I not heard of this guy (Santilli) before? This is some grade-A quackery.

You've got to have some beefy chops to go around saying things like modern chemistry is all wrong, and claim that science is stagnating because Jews.

Thanks, cjr. Got some good humor reading for tonight. ^_^

It's not revolutionary at all. It's a stoichiometric mix of hydrogen and oxygen, produced by burning more energy than you can get back from it. All claims to the contrary are mere fraud.

It does nothing in automobiles. It's not a supplementary fuel of any kind. Its only use is to lighten the wallets of the ignorant.

Everything you wrote about it except the fact that Yull Brown emigrated from Bulgaria is a false claim.

The way they handle energy from the gas is revolutionary. My claims are not false, there are patents being filed here on technology using brown gas in automobiles and heating, i can give you vids about it but they are not translated so you won't understand what is said and i dunno if i can translate em accurately enough either. Basically a professor here named Mircho Tabakov claims his generator is capable of lowering fuel consumption in automobiles by 38-40% with no tweaking to the computer electronics, witch if the car manufacturer puts his hand in it (expand on the technology in other words) that % will raise even more, he says probably more than 60%. He found a method to power the generator more efficiently, that's what took him the most time.The heat produced by the generator is ambient temperature, he said for a 400 km mileage the temperature of the generator rose only by 10 degrees so there is no loss of water by overheating the generator and vaporizing it. The fuel consumtion is something like 2,7 L per 100 km for 1.7 diesel engines, 2,8-3,1 per 100 km for 1.4 petrol engines

Hi, professional chemist here- I suggest you learn a bit of chemistry, as once you do you'll quickly see just what a load of hooey this all is. "Brown's gas" is nothing more than a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen, most typically generated by the electrolysis of water. The way energy is generated from this is by burning it, which is the exact opposite chemical process by which it's generated (2H2O -> 2H2 + O2 vs 2H2 + O2 -> 2H2O). The maximum energy you can get out of this process is exactly the energy you put into generating the original gas mixture, although in practice it's always lower due to various inefficiencies.

Furthermore, the burning of hydrogen to generate energy is a nearly identical process to the burning of hydrocarbons to generate energy, except that the energy density of hydrogen sucks ass compared to that of gasoline. Gasoline has an energy density of 34 MJ/L, while hydrogen at atmospheric pressure has an energy density of a measly 0.01 MJ/L. Even if you compress the hydrogen to extremely high pressures (near 700 atmospheres, which is not a state you want to be storing hydrogen in) you'll only increase the density up to 4.5 MJ/L. Even liquid hydrogen (if anyone is crazy enough to deal with it) only gets up to an energy density of 8.5 MJ/L (only a quarter of that of gas). Like I said, the energy density of hydrogen sucks ass. There's various bits of work that have been done on hydrogen storage to try to safely increase the energy density, but as far as I'm aware none of it has produced anything near good enough to be useful.

As for the claims of using Brown's gas to improve combustion engine efficiency, this is possible, but is simply a worse method of doing what can already be done through much better methods. One of the inefficiencies in combustion engines is incomplete combustion of fuel, where instead of completely combusting to form only water and carbon dioxide, various small, partially oxidized hydrocarbons remain. A way to combat this is to increase the oxygen partial pressure in the fuel mix, and pumping in a hydrogen/oxygen mixture does accomplish this (only by virtue of the oxygen present- the hydrogen present is just a waste of volume). However, as I mentioned there's already much better ways of doing this. Nitrous oxide is already commonly used in racing to accomplish exactly this- the nitrous oxide gas decomposes to oxygen and nitrogen, producing a nice supply of oxygen. Additionally, nitrous oxide is much safer to store than mixtures of hydrogen and oxygen (which are basically bombs waiting to go off). The increase in efficiency is also small enough to not be worth the trouble of needing to store a second (gaseous) fuel, which is why this tech isn't used in standard commercial vehicles (in racing the interest is actually in the increase of instantaneous power generation, not the increase in fuel efficiency, which is basically a rounding error compared to the various other factors affecting fuel efficiency).

Exactly why a closed-system like an aircraft carrier's (or nuke sub, or nuke-powered missile cruiser (if those haven't yet been decommissioned)) would make an excellent source for the conversion. No grid onto which to push the "extra" electrons so the surplus is essentially wasted unless used for something like this.