EcoGeek

Water-powered cars will never work

EcoGeek went live more than two years ago with no fanfare and no traffic. We had a readership of about five people. Three days later, I received the first notice of a breakthrough water-powered car that would solve our energy problems. Those emails have not stopped since.

We wrote a while back about why getting power from water is entirely impossible. But we didn't apply it directly to cars ... so here we go again.

This story at Reuters, which claims that hydrogen is "extracted" from water to power a car is a big steaming pile. I don't know how these things slip through the cracks. I guess we'd all love for there to be a simple solution to the energy crisis. Solutions exist, but this isn't one of them.

Generally these things are picked up on local news stations who have poor fact checking and (obviously) no knowledge of the laws of physics. But the fact that Reuters did a whole story on one of these bogus machines, and then it traveled undeterred around the blogosphere, is simply inexcusable.

"Water-powered cars" generally work like this: Energy stored in a battery or generated by an on-board gasoline-powered generator, splits water into hydrogen and oxygen. The two are then recombined, either in an internal combustion engine or in a fuel cell. Energy from the fuel cell or the engine then drives the car.

So, simplifying this, they're breaking water into hydrogen and oxygen and then burning hydrogen and oxygen to create water. This is, of course, possible, but you can't get more energy out of the system than you put in. Otherwise, it's simply a perpetual motion machine.

If it worked, it could sit on the driveway and make energy all day, every day, and power the entire world without you ever needing to put anything in it. In short, if it worked, it would break the laws of physics, and we would never need to burn another piece of coal again.

This would be an extraordinarily easy thing to prove. Too bad none of these people who make these wonderful devices are too busy talking to the local news to actually build one.

There are a lot of variations on the water-powered car, but they're all bogus. People who say that adding gasoline-generated hydrogen to gasoline increases your gas mileage by 30% are full of it. It doesn't matter if they call it HHO or H20 or Brown's gas. It doesn't matter if they're creating it with a battery or a flywheel. It doesn't matter if they've postulated a sixth dimension from which flows seemingly endless amounts of energy.

Until someone puts a box on the driveway and it generates more power than goes into it ... everyone who says you can power a car with water is either a fool or trying to take someone else's money.

Email IM Bookmark del.icio.us Digg

You do not appear to have Yahoo! Messenger installed. Click here to download and install it.

Email this article

There is a problem with one or more email addresses entered

Enter email addresses, separated by commas.

There is a problem with the email address entered

Email addresses will only be used to email this information on your behalf and will not be used for any marketing purposes.

Alerts

Get an alert for updates:
  • from this author
  • on Media
  • on Cars
  • on Concept Cars

View All Green Alerts »

comments from our community

Showing 1 - 3 of 3 comments

Post Comment
  • Posted by Luke Thu Nov 27, 2008 8:34pm PST
    I think you are being a little closed minded on this issue. There is a significant amounts of information in registered patents about this technology and if you are the expert on science you present yourself as you would know patents can only be granted if the theory behing the development/discovery is not in conflict with good science. I'm para-phrasing here but that is the jist of it. There is a board of scientists who must approve every patent against these criteria. There is also still significant research being conducted on many fronts, and alot positive reviews going around, which seems a little strange if the technology is as bogus as you claim. The reaction scheme is sound to produce energy from water the problem is the initiation and propagation (continuation) of the reaction, which may be why a hybrid version, with gasoline to initiate and propagate the reaction, has been more successful.
    Report Abuse
  • Posted by Russ Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:27am PDT
    Right on Hank Green! Patents are given for anything and everything plus given over and over. I am familiar with this due to the technology I have worked with over the years. The lawyer handling the application has more to do with whether a patent is issued than the inventor - it has to be written right and confusing enough to smoke the examiner. Ninety percent plus of the patents applied for and given are nothing more than papers to hang on the wall. Items patented or in use elsewhere have been reissued in the US as something 'new' and the same elsewhere in the world. With the new worldwide system this should improve though probably not much.
    Report Abuse
  • Posted by Snapshot Thu Oct 22, 2009 5:28am PDT
    Try to look at the big picture! If you owned all of your equipment, (battery, rain-water, solar cell or generator), it would no longer be an issue of using more power in generating hho, than you would get out of your hho system. As long as you can generate enough hho to cook a meal, or to help heat your home, and even help run you car, you have a win-win situation. Because you already own your hho system, and that's less money you'll have to pay out to your utility companies.
    Report Abuse

Leave a Comment:

You must first sign in.

Green Picks Playlist