So was Stan Meyer a fraud or was he on to something?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9JagAv2nUE

I try to balance skepticism with an open mind and enjoy exploring alternatives. They often lead nowhere but I always learn something.

Never saw his dune buggy in person, sure seems like he was doin it.

http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Electrolysis

__________________
1999 E300DT (131,800) 154,000 Black on Black SOLD

2006 CLK 500 coupe Capri Blue on Grey (zoom,zoom)
47,000mi

04 VW TDI Passat 80,000mi
(Techno)

How to eliminate oil dependency through market-driven approaches.
“We could cut oil use in half by 2025, and by 2040, oil use could be zero,”
The Sound of Diesel Speed
Ode to MB

thanks for the link...and I agree.

It is very easy to sit back and conform to the status quo. Our society and system of education conditions us from early on to be that way. But it is the creative thinking mavericks who refuse to conform and think "outside the box" that lead to new discoveries. Nikola Tesla was ridiculed by Thomas Edison for his thoughts on AC electricity. He wasn't recognized for the genius that he was until many years later. It is quite fitting that he became the namesake for this incredible car.....

http://www.teslamotors.com/

I personally feel that the internal combustion engine be it gas or diesel, is very outdated. How many years...how many wars....will it take for meaningful change to occur?

Check this motor out that our military is testing. Would our current system allow something this simple and efficient to reach the mass consumer market? I seriously doubt it.

http://www.regtech.com/Radmax_Technology/Diesel_Engine_Assembly/

http://peswiki.com was mentioned as a reference. So now this thread has no creditability.

Anything to do with http://pureenergysystems.com/ is generally a sham. Just look at what they promote : Magnet Motors, Cold Fusion, Browns Gas, The Bourke Engine, Lightning Power, Zero Point Energy ....

__________________
green 85 300SD 200K miles "Das Schlepper Frog" With a OM603 TBO360 turbo ( To be intercooled someday )( Kalifornistani emissons )
white 79 300SD 200K'ish miles "Farfegnugen" (RIP - cracked crank)
desert storm primer 63 T-bird "The Undead" (long term hibernation)

http://ecomodder.com/forum/fe-graphs/sig692a.png

While I pretty much agree that PESWiki is chock full of alternative energy bunk, and therefore this thread is kinda dead, I've still been chasing down and reading the referenced papers. Since I want to post summaries somewhere for others who are interested, I might as well post them to this thread...

Today's paper is one I found via http://chechfi.ca/tehisyst.htm.

"Feasibility Demonstration of a Road Vehicle Fueled with Hydrogen-Enriched Gasoline", by F. W. Hohen & M. W. Dowdy

Summary:
They modified a new 1973 Chevy Impala so they could A) replace some of the gasoline it uses with Hydrogen gas, and B) lean out the mixture to a point below the lean flammability limit of gasoline in order to C) reduce the emissions and D) do it in a vehicle they could drive on a dynamometer and around a test track. In the process of the study they measured the power output and efficiency of the engine. They succeeded at all their goals: they were indeed able to lean the H2 & gasoline mixture beyond the point where gasoline alone would burn, and in doing so, they did indeed manage to reduce emissions (NOX & CO) from the engine, but raised hydrocarbon emissions. They also reduced the effective horsepower, but increased efficiency and even took it out for a spin to see how drivable the result was. Here's a few of the graphs from the paper:





These first two graphs show that thermal and volumetric efficiency are up.



Sure, things'll look great if you ignore the input of the extra Hydrogen fuel. But they didn't. This graph shows the total fuel the engine consumed (gasoline and hydrogen combined) -- yup, that Hydrogen & gasoline mix in ultra lean concentrations is doing all this with less fuel BTU input.



This last graph shows the seamy underbelly of this demonstration -- higher efficiency, yes, but less power to the wheels, resulting in slower accelleration with the same size engine -- 0 to 65 times went from 16.2 seconds to 25.2 seconds.


As to the relevance to hydrogen injection on diesel engines.. this paper is only marginally relevant. The ultra lean mixtures they achieved got a gasoline engine to run with more air than fuel (like diesels do), but did so at a significantly lower compression ratio. And while they got a 1973 gasoline engine to run more efficiently, it is in comparison to a stock 1973 gasoline engine, something not noteworthy by today's standards for its fuel efficiency to begin with -- most modern engines probably already exceed the efficiency they achieved.

It would have been interesting to see some experiments into why the mixture burns more efficiently than gasoline alone, but they didn't do it because it wasn't one of their goals.

Onto the next paper.
<edit -- arrachments didn;'t take.. readded them>

__________________
'83 300DTurbo http://badges.fuelly.com/images/smallsig-us/318559.png

Broadband: more lies faster.

I'm sure it's entirely possible to improve the fuel efficiency of a '73 Impala, yes? Now try it with something that actually burns all the fuel, like most cars with fuel injection.

__________________
'83 240D with 617.952 and 2.88
'01 VW Beetle TDI
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD
'89 Toyota 4x4, needs 2L-T
'78 280Z with L28ET - 12.86@110
Oil Burner Kartel #35

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b1...oD/bioclip.jpg