Friday, June 13, 2008

Car Runs On Water

A water-run car? It even runs on ocean water, so a drought doesn't affect fuel supply.

It's way too small; hopefully they'll build a larger model soon.

A liter of water will allow the car to run at 80 kph (approximately 50 mph) for "about an hour". There are 3.78 liters in a gallon (I know this because of my milk cartons), which means the car gets about 180 mpg. That's not bad!

Here in California we'd have to use sea water. We just don't have enough fresh water to support our current needs and fuel our cars. The Midwest, on the other hand....

Update, 6/17/08: In line with some of my commenters, "highly unlikely".


allen (in Michigan) said...

Darren, you're scaring me.

The car's a fraud. It takes energy to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen not the other way 'round. That's why fuel cells combine hydrogen and oxygen and produce electricity and water (and heat). Try going the other way, from water to hydrogen and oxygen and you'd better have a supply of electricity handy.

Darren said...

While it certainly looks too good to be true, I'll await further study.

After all, you can make a big explosion either by splitting atoms or by fusing them together :-)

alleninhawaii said...

allen (in michigan) is right, the car is a fraud.

The analogy of making big explosions by splitting atoms or fusing them together actually illustrates that point too.

You can fuse Hydrogen to Helium to get energy, but it takes energy to split Helium back into Hydrogen.

You can split uranium to get the daughter products and energy, but it would take energy to fuse those daughter products back into uranium.

That said there are some chemicals that can be combined with water to produce energy, but then again, the energy is still coming from these other chemicals, and any car using them is not really "running on water"

Fritz J. said...

Color me skeptical. I remember breakthroughs like cold fusion and the 200 mile per gallon carburetor, that the big oil companies bought up to keep us dependent on them, all too well to accept this story as presented. Also, I find it interesting that other news agencies are not jumping all over what would be the biggest energy breakthrough of this century. (Sarcasm on) You don't suppose that Reuters, which is noted for never falling for hoaxes, has finally been taken in do you? (Sarcasm off)

Darren said...

Don't misunderstand--I'm skeptical, but also hopeful. All one has to do is look at the URL of the site I linked to in order to understand why I'm somewhat skeptical.

Heck, I was even suspicious of that blue (not clear) water they used. Still, I'd like further information.