reviewer
88
edits
Changes
Rejected the last text change (by 127.0.0.1) and restored revision 2785 by WikiSysop
The company Fiss-Management from Erfurt, Germany (enjoying a rather damaged reputation because of a warning by the Federal Agency for Financial Market Supervision and by "Test" magazine and probably not more than a one-man-show) offers an on-board-electrolysis cell for passenger cars (2,260 €) and trucks (9,520 €). See also: [[Spritsparkarte]] <!-- English equivalent? -->
The company Fiss-Management from Erfurt, Germany (enjoying a rather damaged reputation because of a warning by the Federal Agency for Financial Market Supervision and by "Test" magazine and probably not more than a one-man-show) offers an on-board-electrolysis cell for passenger cars (2,260 €) and trucks (9,520 €). See also: [[Spritsparkarte]] <!-- English equivalent? -->
==Power efficiency of on-board electrolysis==
The efficiency of an alternator is usually clearly lower than the efficiency of optimized generators; additionally, alternators have to provide electrical output at various and often unfavourable rotational speeds. The efficiency ranges between 50 to 62 percent.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternator#Automotive_alternators</ref> Optimal electrolysis at room temperature (platinum electrodes and optimal potential but not more than 14V) has a maximal efficiency of ≈60%. Appliance of special high temperature electrolysis at about 800 degrees allows to achieve an efficiency of up to 98%. For simple electrolysis cells, sold as extensions, this rate is about a mere 30%. The efficiency of creating hydrogen with gasoline as a fuel is therefore approximately 8%-20%. Using oxyhydrogen as fuel (Brown's Gas) for the engine does not provide 100% either, but is similar to the efficiency of using gasoline. Otto engines only achieve an efficiency of about 30-40%. Moreover, further problems arise due to a higher combustion temperature of hydrogen and result in a higher emission of nitric oxides.<ref>http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasserstoffwirtschaft</ref>.
The higher temperature also causes a higher abrasion of the engine and a higher load for the cooling system; the increased need for repairs and spare parts has a negative impact on the environmental record of the system.
Conclusion: To try and operate an internal combustion engine with extra oxyhydrogen which is created on-board through electrolysis leads to a higher consumption of fuel. The more oxyhydrogen is created, the more expensive the system will be. Running a car just with oxyhydrogen created by above device leads to 4-5 times more fuel consumption:
* Kinetic energy created by gasoline combustion has an efficiency < 40 %
* The rotating alternator has an efficiency of less than 62%
* Creating hydrogen through electrolysis has an efficiency of about 60% (special optimized electrolysis cell)
* Burning hydrogen with oxygen results in an efficiency of < 40 %
Only about 0,4 x 0,62 x 0,6 x 0,4 = 6% (perhaps 10% at max.) of the gasoline's energy is used. Combustion of just gasoline results in an efficiency of 40% at max. Operating a car only with oxyhydrogen from the on-board electrolysis consumes at least 4 to 5 times as much. Massive usage of this principle (even mixed) would have catastrophic impacts from an ecological point of view due to higher CO<sub><small>2</small></sub> emissions and result in much higher costs.
Achieving a pure hydrogen operation with the kits offered is illusory since a usual alternator is in no way constructed to provide enough output even for a small car: The maximum output of an alternator (for large executive cars) is about 3,000 W which corresponds roughly to the drive train of a small scooter.
Producing hydrogen gas externally in industrial electrolysis facilities to supply all cars would please only the industries producing nuclear energy and brown coal since the additional huge amounts of electrical energy necessary cannot be provided by renewable energy sources. Additionally, further problems storing hydrogen and high losses would have to be addressed: Unlike gasoline, hydrogen will diffuse through the walls of usual storage tanks, so after some time, the tank will be empty...
Research done in USA proved that such an onboard water electrolysis does not make sense since fuel consumption increases, it does not decrease as claimed.<ref>[http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/how_to/4276846.html?series=19 Popular Mechanics, Artikel ''Water-Powered Cars: Hydrogen Electrolyzer Mod Can't Up MPGs'']</ref><ref>[http://www.wyff4.com/news/17036761/detail.html Greenville News Looking Out 4 You: ''Water 4 Gas Fails to Boost Mileage'']</ref><ref>[http://www.3news.co.nz/Video/CampbellLive/tabid/367/articleID/64717/cat/84/Default.aspx Hydrogen conversion claims put to the test]</ref><ref>http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/07/water4gas.html Consumer Affairs Water4gas</ref>
==Clean World Energies and their H-Reactor==
==Clean World Energies and their H-Reactor==