|
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
Bob Douglas wrote:
> There is a new invention out there. Thanks to new Technology you can > improve your milage by up to 50%. > > And Yes your vehicle CAN drive on gas and water. I know it sounds crazy, > but it is true. > > Have a look at what the website below has to say. Many people are using > this system already. > > Oil Companies have known this proven Technology for a long time > ... Just to let you know.. > > Don't you want to save on fuel and meantime help the environment too ? > > http://www.richardsprovenidea.com > > > > > Ever heard of water injection? |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang
<dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: > Bob Douglas wrote: > > There is a new invention out there. Thanks to new Technology you can > > improve your milage by up to 50%. > > > > And Yes your vehicle CAN drive on gas and water. I know it sounds crazy, > > but it is true. > > > > Have a look at what the website below has to say. Many people are using > > this system already. > > > > Oil Companies have known this proven Technology for a long time > > ... Just to let you know.. > > > > Don't you want to save on fuel and meantime help the environment too ? > > > > http://www.richardsprovenidea.com > > > > > > > > > > > Ever heard of water injection? I think you mean anti-detonation injection. It was used on big aircraft engines for years. When the engine was run at full power like at takeoff, a mixture of alcohol and water was sprayed into the fuel air mixture to prevent detonation. When the power was reduced to a more cruse setting the injection was turned off. The engine did not run on water. I saw a web site claiming 50% better mileage by hydrolysis of water into hydrogen and oxygen. It takes power to brake to oxygen and hydrogen bonds. It is at least as much power as you then get from burning it to again make water. No process is 100% efficient. I have to laugh at the new super efficient cars. Unless you are using a renewable energy source You are wasting energy. Every time you change state, you take a loss. Oil to heat, heat to steam, steam to turbine to generator through transmission lines to make hydrogen or charge a battery. Its like global warming. It's not science it is a religion or a cult. |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldonrl@gmail.com>
wrote: >In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang ><dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: > >> Bob Douglas wrote: >> > There is a new invention out there. Thanks to new Technology you can >> > improve your milage by up to 50%. >> > >> > And Yes your vehicle CAN drive on gas and water. I know it sounds crazy, >> > but it is true. >> > >> > Have a look at what the website below has to say. Many people are using >> > this system already. >> > >> > Oil Companies have known this proven Technology for a long time >> > ... Just to let you know.. >> > >> > Don't you want to save on fuel and meantime help the environment too ? >> > >> > http://www.richardsprovenidea.com >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Ever heard of water injection? >I think you mean anti-detonation injection. It was used on big >aircraft engines for years. When the engine was run at full power like >at takeoff, a mixture of alcohol and water was sprayed into the fuel >air mixture to prevent detonation. When the power was reduced to a >more cruse setting the injection was turned off. The engine did not >run on water. I saw a web site claiming 50% better mileage by >hydrolysis of water into hydrogen and oxygen. It takes power to brake >to oxygen and hydrogen bonds. It is at least as much power as you then >get from burning it to again make water. No process is 100% efficient. No, but this one is 100% fraudulent. >I have to laugh at the new super efficient cars. Unless you are using >a renewable energy source You are wasting energy. Every time you >change state, you take a loss. Oil to heat, heat to steam, steam to >turbine to generator through transmission lines to make hydrogen or >charge a battery. The super efficient cars on the road today are hybrids which don't use any current from the grid. They are demonstrably more efficient than conventional cars. As for the plug-in models which may or may not appear in the future, they could easily be more efficient than an ICE car which has its own set of inefficiencies. > Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >religion or a cult. Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric universe? |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
Gordon McGrew wrote: > On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldonrl@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >>In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang >><dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: >> snip > >> Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >>religion or a cult. > > > Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right > wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric > universe? > Newsflash! There is a growing in the rank and file of skeptics that include numerous internationally known scientists. Do a some research and utilize a little independent thinking. JT (Doing his part with his '83 Civic FE) |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
> > > Gordon McGrew wrote: >> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldonrl@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >>> In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang >>> <dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: >>> > > > snip > > > >> >>> Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >>> religion or a cult. >> >> >> Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right >> wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric >> universe? >> > > > Newsflash! > > There is a growing in the rank and file of skeptics that include > numerous internationally known scientists. > > Do a some research and utilize a little independent thinking. > > JT > > (Doing his part with his '83 Civic FE) > the title is: gasoline "AND" water, not "instead of". steam injection is not new. steam expands more across a temperature gradient than most other gases. it therefore improves power yield when using what might otherwise be waste heat from combustion. many jet engines used to use it on takeoff for extra power. http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ad.main/51049/ it's also been researched for diesel http://www.sae.org/technical/papers/2003-01-3249 and it's used in gasoline engines for racing. http://bbs.scoobynet.com/general-tec...-any-good.html |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:28:19 GMT, Grumpy AuContraire
<Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote: > > >Gordon McGrew wrote: >> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldonrl@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >>>In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang >>><dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: >>> > > >snip > > > >> >>> Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >>>religion or a cult. >> >> >> Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right >> wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric >> universe? >> > > >Newsflash! > >There is a growing in the rank and file of skeptics that include >numerous internationally known scientists. Gee, that is what the creationists say about evolution. |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
On Mar 8, 10:55 pm, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com>
wrote: > On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > >In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang > ><drago...@shaw.ca> wrote: > > >> Bob Douglas wrote: > >> > There is a new invention out there. Thanks to new Technology you can > >> > improve your milage by up to 50%. > > >> > And Yes your vehicle CAN drive on gas and water. I know it sounds crazy, > >> > but it is true. > > >> > Have a look at what the website below has to say. Many people are using > >> > this system already. > > >> > Oil Companies have known this proven Technology for a long time > >> > ... Just to let you know.. > > >> > Don't you want to save on fuel and meantime help the environment too ? > > >> >http://www.richardsprovenidea.com > > >> Ever heard of water injection? > >I think you mean anti-detonation injection. It was used on big > >aircraft engines for years. When the engine was run at full power like > >at takeoff, a mixture of alcohol and water was sprayed into the fuel > >air mixture to prevent detonation. When the power was reduced to a > >more cruse setting the injection was turned off. The engine did not > >run on water. I saw a web site claiming 50% better mileage by > >hydrolysis of water into hydrogen and oxygen. It takes power to brake > >to oxygen and hydrogen bonds. It is at least as much power as you then > >get from burning it to again make water. No process is 100% efficient. > > No, but this one is 100% fraudulent. > > >I have to laugh at the new super efficient cars. Unless you are using > >a renewable energy source You are wasting energy. Every time you > >change state, you take a loss. Oil to heat, heat to steam, steam to > >turbine to generator through transmission lines to make hydrogen or > >charge a battery. > > The super efficient cars on the road today are hybrids which don't use > any current from the grid. They are demonstrably more efficient than > conventional cars. As for the plug-in models which may or may not > appear in the future, they could easily be more efficient than an ICE > car which has its own set of inefficiencies. > > > Its like global warming. It's not science it is a > >religion or a cult. > > Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right > wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric > universe? Electric cars are not practical. Hybrid electric and plug-in hybrid cars are novelties. I fail to see how they will become mainstream, even the day that petroleum runs out. As for renewable energy sources, if the production involves the use of fossil fuel, then it's a fraud, be it hydrogen economy, ethanol economy and even methanol economy. If i have to make a choice, then i'm inclined towards methanol for its lower production cost and the availabilty of raw material (coal) American cars is now running partly on corn that can be used to feed people and livestock. It's only a matter of time when Americans give up corn bread and sausage for rice and tofu, so that they can pump gas.. |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 22:34:27 -0700 (PDT), bi241@scn.org wrote:
>On Mar 8, 10:55 pm, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com> >wrote: >> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang >> ><drago...@shaw.ca> wrote: >> >> >> Bob Douglas wrote: >> >> > There is a new invention out there. Thanks to new Technology you can >> >> > improve your milage by up to 50%. >> >> >> > And Yes your vehicle CAN drive on gas and water. I know it sounds crazy, >> >> > but it is true. >> >> >> > Have a look at what the website below has to say. Many people are using >> >> > this system already. >> >> >> > Oil Companies have known this proven Technology for a long time >> >> > ... Just to let you know.. >> >> >> > Don't you want to save on fuel and meantime help the environment too ? >> >> >> >http://www.richardsprovenidea.com >> >> >> Ever heard of water injection? >> >I think you mean anti-detonation injection. It was used on big >> >aircraft engines for years. When the engine was run at full power like >> >at takeoff, a mixture of alcohol and water was sprayed into the fuel >> >air mixture to prevent detonation. When the power was reduced to a >> >more cruse setting the injection was turned off. The engine did not >> >run on water. I saw a web site claiming 50% better mileage by >> >hydrolysis of water into hydrogen and oxygen. It takes power to brake >> >to oxygen and hydrogen bonds. It is at least as much power as you then >> >get from burning it to again make water. No process is 100% efficient. >> >> No, but this one is 100% fraudulent. >> >> >I have to laugh at the new super efficient cars. Unless you are using >> >a renewable energy source You are wasting energy. Every time you >> >change state, you take a loss. Oil to heat, heat to steam, steam to >> >turbine to generator through transmission lines to make hydrogen or >> >charge a battery. >> >> The super efficient cars on the road today are hybrids which don't use >> any current from the grid. They are demonstrably more efficient than >> conventional cars. As for the plug-in models which may or may not >> appear in the future, they could easily be more efficient than an ICE >> car which has its own set of inefficiencies. >> >> > Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >> >religion or a cult. >> >> Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right >> wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric >> universe? > >Electric cars are not practical. Hybrid electric and plug-in hybrid >cars are novelties. I fail to see how they will become mainstream, >even the day that petroleum runs out. Mainstream? Like a Ford Explorer was mainstream when it was the best selling SUV? Did you hear that Prius outsold Explorer last year? When gas is threatening to hit $4, how is something that dramatically reduces fuel consumption a novelty? The Jury is still out on electric cars. A few years ago they were a joke. Improving technology and rising fuel prices may make them practical. We'll see. I confess to having significant doubt about this. >As for renewable energy sources, if the production involves the use of >fossil fuel, then it's a fraud, be it hydrogen economy, ethanol >economy and even methanol economy. What you really mean is, "Is it a net gain in energy." It can be. Again, the jury is out. Ethanol is really solar power, but harnessing it is not necessarily efficient. Especially if you are using corn. > If i have to make a choice, then >i'm inclined towards methanol for its lower production cost and the >availabilty of raw material (coal) Still have to look at the overall efficiency. Of all the above, electric hybrid is the only one widely available and demonstrably saving energy right now. >American cars is now running partly on corn that can be used to feed >people and livestock. It's only a matter of time when Americans give >up corn bread and sausage for rice and tofu, so that they can pump >gas.. Gotta have your priorities. Wouldn't kill us to eat a little less steak and eggs. |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
Gordon McGrew wrote: > On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:28:19 GMT, Grumpy AuContraire > <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote: > > >> >>Gordon McGrew wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldonrl@gmail.com> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang >>>><dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: >>>> >> >> >>snip >> >> >> >> >>>>Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >>>>religion or a cult. >>> >>> >>>Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right >>>wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric >>>universe? >>> >> >> >>Newsflash! >> >>There is a growing in the rank and file of skeptics that include >>numerous internationally known scientists. > > > Gee, that is what the creationists say about evolution. > Wow! Whatta retort... Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel, eh? JT |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
bi241@scn.org wrote: > On Mar 8, 10:55 pm, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com> > wrote: > >>On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldo...@gmail.com> >>wrote: >> >> >> >> >>>In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang >>><drago...@shaw.ca> wrote: >> >>>>Bob Douglas wrote: >>>> >>>>>There is a new invention out there. Thanks to new Technology you can >>>>>improve your milage by up to 50%. >> >>>>>And Yes your vehicle CAN drive on gas and water. I know it sounds crazy, >>>>>but it is true. >> >>>>>Have a look at what the website below has to say. Many people are using >>>>>this system already. >> >>>>>Oil Companies have known this proven Technology for a long time >>>>>... Just to let you know.. >> >>>>>Don't you want to save on fuel and meantime help the environment too ? >> >>>>>http://www.richardsprovenidea.com >> >>>>Ever heard of water injection? >>> >>>I think you mean anti-detonation injection. It was used on big >>>aircraft engines for years. When the engine was run at full power like >>>at takeoff, a mixture of alcohol and water was sprayed into the fuel >>>air mixture to prevent detonation. When the power was reduced to a >>>more cruse setting the injection was turned off. The engine did not >>>run on water. I saw a web site claiming 50% better mileage by >>>hydrolysis of water into hydrogen and oxygen. It takes power to brake >>>to oxygen and hydrogen bonds. It is at least as much power as you then >>>get from burning it to again make water. No process is 100% efficient. >> >>No, but this one is 100% fraudulent. >> >> >>>I have to laugh at the new super efficient cars. Unless you are using >>>a renewable energy source You are wasting energy. Every time you >>>change state, you take a loss. Oil to heat, heat to steam, steam to >>>turbine to generator through transmission lines to make hydrogen or >>>charge a battery. >> >>The super efficient cars on the road today are hybrids which don't use >>any current from the grid. They are demonstrably more efficient than >>conventional cars. As for the plug-in models which may or may not >>appear in the future, they could easily be more efficient than an ICE >>car which has its own set of inefficiencies. >> >> >>> Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >>>religion or a cult. >> >>Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right >>wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric >>universe? > > > Electric cars are not practical. Hybrid electric and plug-in hybrid > cars are novelties. I fail to see how they will become mainstream, > even the day that petroleum runs out. > Oh, I think that "plug in" electric cars are on the brink of being practical and could go a long way to end out dependence on foreign fossil fuels. As soon as a compact sedan is produced that has a range of over 200 miles per charge, the picture will change drastically. The time has come to end this addiction to internal combustion engines simply to end the economic blackmail being practiced by OPEC and others. > As for renewable energy sources, if the production involves the use of > fossil fuel, then it's a fraud, be it hydrogen economy, ethanol > economy and even methanol economy. If i have to make a choice, then > i'm inclined towards methanol for its lower production cost and the > availabilty of raw material (coal) > Ethanol has proved to be practical in Brazil where it has been the main fuel for automobiles for decades. So successful is their program that a substantial portion their own limited oil production is exported. > American cars is now running partly on corn that can be used to feed > people and livestock. It's only a matter of time when Americans give > up corn bread and sausage for rice and tofu, so that they can pump > gas.. > Blame that on the stranglehold that big agriculture, (Archer-Daniels etc.) have on most farm production. Grow corn for ethanol, they win both ways and so does big oil since they distribute the product. JT |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:09:53 GMT, Grumpy AuContraire
<Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote: > > >Gordon McGrew wrote: >> On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:28:19 GMT, Grumpy AuContraire >> <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote: >> >> >>> >>>Gordon McGrew wrote: >>> >>>>On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldonrl@gmail.com> >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang >>>>><dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: >>>>> >>> >>> >>>snip >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>>Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >>>>>religion or a cult. >>>> >>>> >>>>Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right >>>>wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric >>>>universe? >>>> >>> >>> >>>Newsflash! >>> >>>There is a growing in the rank and file of skeptics that include >>>numerous internationally known scientists. >> >> >> Gee, that is what the creationists say about evolution. >> > > >Wow! Whatta retort... Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel, eh? > I agree that creationists are the bottom of the barrel, but this is exactly the same tactic. A handful of scientists, mostly untrained in the relevant discipline, being paraded out as a "credible opposition" to the consensus opinion of the experts in field. Evolution is a theory in crises. Is that how you would describe the theory of anthropogenic global warming? |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
Gordon McGrew wrote: > On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:09:53 GMT, Grumpy AuContraire > <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote: > > >> >>Gordon McGrew wrote: >> >>>On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:28:19 GMT, Grumpy AuContraire >>><Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Gordon McGrew wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldonrl@gmail.com> >>>>>wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang >>>>>><dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>snip >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >>>>>>religion or a cult. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right >>>>>wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric >>>>>universe? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Newsflash! >>>> >>>>There is a growing in the rank and file of skeptics that include >>>>numerous internationally known scientists. >>> >>> >>>Gee, that is what the creationists say about evolution. >>> >> >> >>Wow! Whatta retort... Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel, eh? >> > > > I agree that creationists are the bottom of the barrel, but this is > exactly the same tactic. A handful of scientists, mostly untrained in > the relevant discipline, being paraded out as a "credible opposition" > to the consensus opinion of the experts in field. Evolution is a > theory in crises. Is that how you would describe the theory of > anthropogenic global warming? > > For starters, I'll take William Gray over your Al Gore... JT |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 00:03:31 GMT, Grumpy AuContraire
<Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote: > > >Gordon McGrew wrote: >> On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:09:53 GMT, Grumpy AuContraire >> <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote: >> >> >>> >>>Gordon McGrew wrote: >>> >>>>On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 22:28:19 GMT, Grumpy AuContraire >>>><Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Gordon McGrew wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldonrl@gmail.com> >>>>>>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang >>>>>>><dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>snip >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >>>>>>>religion or a cult. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right >>>>>>wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric >>>>>>universe? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Newsflash! >>>>> >>>>>There is a growing in the rank and file of skeptics that include >>>>>numerous internationally known scientists. >>>> >>>> >>>>Gee, that is what the creationists say about evolution. >>>> >>> >>> >>>Wow! Whatta retort... Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel, eh? >>> >> >> >> I agree that creationists are the bottom of the barrel, but this is >> exactly the same tactic. A handful of scientists, mostly untrained in >> the relevant discipline, being paraded out as a "credible opposition" >> to the consensus opinion of the experts in field. Evolution is a >> theory in crises. Is that how you would describe the theory of >> anthropogenic global warming? >> >> > > >For starters, I'll take William Gray over your Al Gore... > >JT If you are going to cite Nobel Prize winners, why don't you cite the climatologist; Stephen Schneider. Gray is an old-time Hurricane expert, not really a climatology guy. |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
On Mar 11, 12:11 am, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com>
wrote: > On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 22:34:27 -0700 (PDT), bi...@scn.org wrote: > >On Mar 8, 10:55 pm, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com> > >wrote: > >> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:56:44 -0800, road apple <sheldo...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > > >> >In article <vAnAj.56048$pM4.29034@pd7urf1no>, Tony Hwang > >> ><drago...@shaw.ca> wrote: > > >> >> Bob Douglas wrote: > >> >> > There is a new invention out there. Thanks to new Technology you can > >> >> > improve your milage by up to 50%. > > >> >> > And Yes your vehicle CAN drive on gas and water. I know it sounds crazy, > >> >> > but it is true. > > >> >> > Have a look at what the website below has to say. Many people are using > >> >> > this system already. > > >> >> > Oil Companies have known this proven Technology for a long time > >> >> > ... Just to let you know.. > > >> >> > Don't you want to save on fuel and meantime help the environment too ? > > >> >> >http://www.richardsprovenidea.com > > >> >> Ever heard of water injection? > >> >I think you mean anti-detonation injection. It was used on big > >> >aircraft engines for years. When the engine was run at full power like > >> >at takeoff, a mixture of alcohol and water was sprayed into the fuel > >> >air mixture to prevent detonation. When the power was reduced to a > >> >more cruse setting the injection was turned off. The engine did not > >> >run on water. I saw a web site claiming 50% better mileage by > >> >hydrolysis of water into hydrogen and oxygen. It takes power to brake > >> >to oxygen and hydrogen bonds. It is at least as much power as you then > >> >get from burning it to again make water. No process is 100% efficient. > > >> No, but this one is 100% fraudulent. > > >> >I have to laugh at the new super efficient cars. Unless you are using > >> >a renewable energy source You are wasting energy. Every time you > >> >change state, you take a loss. Oil to heat, heat to steam, steam to > >> >turbine to generator through transmission lines to make hydrogen or > >> >charge a battery. > > >> The super efficient cars on the road today are hybrids which don't use > >> any current from the grid. They are demonstrably more efficient than > >> conventional cars. As for the plug-in models which may or may not > >> appear in the future, they could easily be more efficient than an ICE > >> car which has its own set of inefficiencies. > > >> > Its like global warming. It's not science it is a > >> >religion or a cult. > > >> Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right > >> wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric > >> universe? > > >Electric cars are not practical. Hybrid electric and plug-in hybrid > >cars are novelties. I fail to see how they will become mainstream, > >even the day that petroleum runs out. > > Mainstream? Like a Ford Explorer was mainstream when it was the best > selling SUV? Did you hear that Prius outsold Explorer last year? > > When gas is threatening to hit $4, how is something that dramatically > reduces fuel consumption a novelty? > Note that the batteries in hybrid cars are charged by the good old gasoline-powered engines and it takes a loss in the transformation of engery. Hybrid technology is only about regenerative braking, which saves just a little energy, at the expense of extra components. And net gain in energy? Zero!! You can clearly see that Prius used all the tricks in the book for fuel efficiency, it has a small engine, very high compression ratio, a minimal gross weight, and a streamline body. That's how it gets good mpg. The electric components are not doing any good. They are there as an excuse for making smaller and more efficient internal combustion engines, which is very un-American... haha!!! Plug-in hybrid is inconvenient, but it's honest. Hybrid is not just a novelty, i would say it's a scam. Manufacturers are leading comsumers into thinking that somehow the energy recovered from regenerative braking can do any significant work. Strip the Prius off all of its hybrid nonsense and it would do even better! |
Re: NEW Vehilcles Can run on Gasoline and Water!
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 16:35:05 -0700 (PDT), bi241@scn.org wrote:
>> >> >> >I have to laugh at the new super efficient cars. Unless you are using >> >> >a renewable energy source You are wasting energy. Every time you >> >> >change state, you take a loss. Oil to heat, heat to steam, steam to >> >> >turbine to generator through transmission lines to make hydrogen or >> >> >charge a battery. >> >> >> The super efficient cars on the road today are hybrids which don't use >> >> any current from the grid. They are demonstrably more efficient than >> >> conventional cars. As for the plug-in models which may or may not >> >> appear in the future, they could easily be more efficient than an ICE >> >> car which has its own set of inefficiencies. >> >> >> > Its like global warming. It's not science it is a >> >> >religion or a cult. >> >> >> Why is it that the scientists all think it is a science and the right >> >> wing media thinks it's a cult? Is this like evolution? Non-geocentric >> >> universe? >> >> >Electric cars are not practical. Hybrid electric and plug-in hybrid >> >cars are novelties. I fail to see how they will become mainstream, >> >even the day that petroleum runs out. >> >> Mainstream? Like a Ford Explorer was mainstream when it was the best >> selling SUV? Did you hear that Prius outsold Explorer last year? >> >> When gas is threatening to hit $4, how is something that dramatically >> reduces fuel consumption a novelty? >> > >Note that the batteries in hybrid cars are charged by the good old >gasoline-powered engines and it takes a loss in the transformation of >engery. Hybrid technology is only about regenerative braking, which >saves just a little energy, at the expense of extra components. And >net gain in energy? Zero!! Hybrid vehicles are the most fuel efficient models in every category where they are available. The improvement in fuel efficiency with the best systems is very significant. Your criticism is that the batteries don't suck energy out of the air. Well, no . Hybrids save fuel. As far as I can tell, that is just as good as sucking energy out of the air. >You can clearly see that Prius used all the tricks in the book for >fuel efficiency, it has a small engine, very high compression ratio, a >minimal gross weight, and a streamline body. Bullshit. First of all, the smaller engine is possible because the electric motor provides additional power to compensate. That is one of the ways that the hybrid system saves fuel. The smaller engine operates at more efficient power levels more of the time and it also saves some weight. Second: regenerative braking is meaningless unless you have a battery to store the recovered energy and a motor to use it later. It is analogous to saying you don't need that piston engine because all the energy comes from gasoline. Third: If you want to minimize gross weight, the place to start would be that very heavy and supposedly worthless battery and motor. At a curb weight of 2932 pounds, the Prius looks pretty heavy if you don't consider the hybrid hardware. Minimizing weight hardly compensates for carrying dead weight, so the hybrid system must be earning its keep. Fourth: Streamline body? Have you noticed that Prius gets better mileage in the city than on the highway? Fifth: If all of the above plus a compression ratio (13.0:1) were all it took to get 40+ mpg, there would be all kinds of 40+ mpg cars out there. But the only ones are hybrids. Even the Yaris can't touch the Prius. That alone tell you something is going on here. > That's how it gets good >mpg. The electric components are not doing any good. They are there as >an excuse for making smaller and more efficient internal combustion >engines, wt. Eng. Comp Aero mpg Prius 2932 1.5L 13.0 : 1 ? 48/45 Yaris 2326 1.5L 10.5 : 1 ? 29/37 Civic Hy 2877 1.3 10.8 Identical 40/45 Civic 2690 1.8 10.5 Identical 25/36 Seems like those electrical components are doing something. >which is very un-American... haha!!! You misspelled un-Arabian. > >Plug-in hybrid is inconvenient, but it's honest. Hybrid is not just a >novelty, i would say it's a scam. Manufacturers are leading comsumers >into thinking that somehow the energy recovered from regenerative >braking can do any significant work. Strip the Prius off all of its >hybrid nonsense and it would do even better! |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:21 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands