This could change the world

Van Living Forum

Help Support Van Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Sounds like a Nigerian scam to me.<br /><br />
 
really? I thought it was some international science fair thing...well...i shouldn't be surprised, having not learned my lesson on the As Seen On Tv products i've bought lol
 
It was a science fair in Nigeria, but the science community in the rest of the globe is calling BS on this one.<br /><br />
 
Farts would at least provide methane.&nbsp; They would be hard to store, though...
 
<span style="color: #333399;">It was a science fair in Nigeria, but the science community in the rest of the globe is calling BS on this one.</span><br /><br />If its on the internet, it must be true. And yes, I have faith that my Nigerian prince will wire me my money back once his heavy equipment and bulldozers are exported out of the country. I think he has ponys roo.
 
Until I see this "urine powered" generator posted with some duplication of this process I'll stay a healthy skeptic. As much as I admire the premise of this new generator fuel I'm going to take a "wait and see" attitude.

But, if this is the real deal this would solve a great many solutions in remote parts of the world that don't have commercial electricity.

Keeping an open mind!
 
Having sent 3 kids to Ohio University for 4 degrees (go Bobcats), and knowing full well that it has usually been ranked in the Playboy top 10 party schools, I am not surprised that they have an adequate supply of urine from all the beer that is consumed there.
 
Good to know some folks are exploring out-of-the-box possibilities of this sort.&nbsp; The western US is covered with ruins where specific plantlife species thrive on urine&nbsp;and human wastes&nbsp;deposited in concentrations on the ground a thousand years ago.&nbsp; It qualifies as a growth industry, human and agricultural animal urine.
 
Well, it sounds like it should be real. &nbsp;I barely remember my high school chemistry, but pee is largely water. &nbsp;Water is H2O. &nbsp;Hydrogen is&nbsp;combustible&nbsp; &nbsp;If you can break the water&nbsp;molecules&nbsp;apart, you have a&nbsp;combustible&nbsp;gas (or liquid at a very, very cold&nbsp;temperature). &nbsp;The issue is how to discover a way to break the molecules apart that takes less energy than is produced. &nbsp;We don't know if that was the case in the news article reports. &nbsp;If not, the process should have still worked, but just not in a way that would make sense to implement.<br /><br />The OU article as I read it suggested that ammonia was a way to do that and that ammonia is present in pee, at least after it leaves the body. &nbsp;But the article was from 2007 or something. &nbsp;<br /><br />.....and that is the total amount this boy can contribute to the subject; or in other words, my bladder is empty. &nbsp;And if there are any chemical engineers out there that know better, I will certainly defer to them.
 
There have been plans for a long time out that show you how to operate an engine/vehicle off just water.&nbsp; But they need to find a way to make money off the concept/not get assassinated by the oil industry.&nbsp; So far they've switched the process around so instead of the conversion being internal to the car, they do it at the 'pump', so you fill up on hydrogen.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I think they used the excuse that the conversion/electrolysis was too dangerous just to stick in a car, but in reality it means there would be no way for them to monetize it unless they convince you to pay to pump water into your tank.<br /><br />A guy named Stan Meyers already made one, a dune buggy (reportedly..) <img src="/images/boards/smilies/rofl.gif" />&nbsp; But im no expert, just remember reading a bunch of stuff about it a few years back.
 
DazarGaidin said:
There have been plans for a long time out that show you how to operate an engine/vehicle off just water.&nbsp; But they need to find a way to make money off the concept/not get assassinated by the oil industry.&nbsp; So far they've switched the process around so instead of the conversion being internal to the car, they do it at the 'pump', so you fill up on hydrogen.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I think they used the excuse that the conversion/electrolysis was too dangerous just to stick in a car, but in reality it means there would be no way for them to monetize it unless they convince you to pay to pump water into your tank.<br /><br />A guy named Stan Meyers already made one, a dune buggy (reportedly..) <img src="/images/boards/smilies/rofl.gif" />&nbsp; But im no expert, just remember reading a bunch of stuff about it a few years back.
<br /><br />DazarGaidin:&nbsp; The problem isn't generating enough hydrogen a lot more cheaply energy-wise than gasoline.&nbsp; The problem is that modern internal combustion engines are designed to burn gasoline as fuel, and that all manner of factors involving engine performance are compromised when other types of fuel are attempted.<br /><br />The conversion of water to hydrogen/oxygen isn't dangerous... it's simple and easy.&nbsp; But a lot of waste heat is generated as a byproduct, which means the containers, hoses, etc, have to be capable of surviving the heat and continue functioning.<br /><br />Meanwhile, there's the problem of what the water leaves behind when it's converted.&nbsp; A brown goop, eventually tends to build up inside and needs cleaning.<br /><br />But the hydrogen needs burning immediately, can't be stored under any pressure, as a practical matter, which would be dangerous.<br /><br />Which is to say, it&nbsp;could be done, but someone would have to be motivated to overcome a few problems.<br /><br />The one-size-fits-all retrofits offered off the shelf online don't overcome them, as nearly as I've been able to determine.&nbsp;
 
Interesting.&nbsp; You'd think those seem much more surmountable than some of the electric problems they have been busting balls over all these years (mainly batteries). &nbsp; But i guess profitability is the driving factor for innovation.
 
A friend I new many years ago and I were working on a system for better fuel economy. We used it on a 68 ford galaxy 500 with a 302 V8 engine. We used it on the car for about a month. No difference in performance and we got 60 MPG in town. Im being vague about the details because I may still work on it. We had safety issues that still need to be addressed. We stopped because we blew the hood off the car.&nbsp;I've done alot of thinking over the years about the problems and I have alot of ideas to solve them....I guess I just need to decide if I want to persue it again or not.
 
DazarGaidin said:
Interesting.&nbsp; You'd think those seem much more surmountable than some of the electric problems they have been busting balls over all these years (mainly batteries). &nbsp; But i guess profitability is the driving factor for innovation.
I believe the problems could be overcome without a lot of difficulty on large vehicles pre-dating computerized interference with tweeking various mechanical issues.&nbsp; But the newer alloys used on engines and heads, the tighter tolerances, I'm less certain about.&nbsp; Whereas, converting a 1960s-1970s gasoline engine school bus to run on 100% hydrogen generated by the electrical system of the vehicle I believe is doable.<br /><br />A person would have to be willing to compromise firing it up and immediately driving away in it, though.&nbsp; It takes a while to get the hydrogen generator agitated enough to supply sufficient hydrogen to run the vehicle.&nbsp; And there are a lot of compromises involved.&nbsp; The smaller the volume of water in the generator the more rapidly it begins supplying enough hydrogen, but it builds up heat a lot more rapidly than a greater volume of water, and is a lot more difficult to&nbsp;reduce the waste heat.<br /><br />The reason I used a school bus for an example instead of a car is directly related to the size of the required components dealing with that volume of water, the amount of surface area necessary to keep it sufficiently cool, and enough room under the hood for the required plumbing.
 
sidat202 said:
A friend I new many years ago and I were working on a system for better fuel economy. We used it on a 68 ford galaxy 500 with a 302 V8 engine. We used it on the car for about a month. No difference in performance and we got 60 MPG in town. Im being vague about the details because I may still work on it. We had safety issues that still need to be addressed. We stopped because we brew the hood off the car.&nbsp;I've done alot of thinking over the years about the problems and I have alot of ideas to solve them....I guess I just need to decide if I want to persue it again or not.
<br /><br />Sounds as though it might be a worthy project.
 
howardsells2000 said:
soooo..... did we decide if this is real or not?
it seems it is true, and it is an evolving technology that will be fought to keep the prices of fossil fuels up there!..... by the time this gets watered down into a doable&nbsp;processes for the public to reap the&nbsp;benefits&nbsp; i fear we will be long gone!
 
Top