[Eeyore]

You can look them up for yourself, you lazy shit. They're no great secret.

Graham

 

[Rich Grise]

And bumble bees cannot fly.

They couldn't if they had fixed wings. But they seem to have learned
a trick - they FLAP them! Imagine your surprise!

(Hint - a helicopter can't fly if its rotor isn't rotating.)

If your water-powered car is such a great idea, just build one and
show us!

Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Eeyore]

Your EPA and NHTSA have all the data you could want regarding the matter.

Graham

 

[R.H. Allen]

Not in most of the country as far as I know. I'm fairly certain that
scooters are classified as motorcycles in Ontario for instance.

In the US, whether or not it's classified as a motorcycle depends on
what state you're in and the size of the engine. Where I live, anything
50 cc and under does not require a motorcycle license, but is also
illegal on highways (it's also usually pretty easy to tell which drivers
*don't* have motorcycle licenses just from the way they drive). I'm not
sure on what basis the state would classify an electric scooter, since
50 cc doesn't make much sense in that case, but I haven't seen any
electrics at the two local scooter shops I drive past every day.

I think the biggest issue with electric scooters around here would be
recharging them. Virtually every scooter driver I know -- and I know
more than a few -- is an apartment dweller and would have a tough time
finding a place to plug in. In a lot of ways it's the same
infrastructure issue that affects electric cars.

70km/hr is close to suicide on the highway. It's dangerous enough in an
automobile I shudder to imagine what that would be like on a bike.

Not far from me last year a scooter driver doing about 60 mph on the
highway was literally run over from behind and killed by a driver in a
car that was moving much faster....

 

[Eeyore]

---
Poor uninformed stupid ass, from:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1312389

"In 1934, August Magnan and André Sainte-Lague (1) concluded from a
simple mathematical analysis that the flight of bees was
“impossible.”"

Magnan is reported to have written that he and a Mr. Saint-Lague had applied the
equations of air resistance to insects and found that their flight was
impossible, but that "One shouldn't be surprised that the results of the
calculations don't square with reality".[19]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumblebee#Flight

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

actually graham, the electrolysis step is *very* efficient.
approximately 95%.

The best I've seen quoted is 85%. Typically lower - as bad as 50%. It varies
AIUI with your choice of electrode material too.

however, that's from electricity to uncompressed
untransported hydrogen. You've been around here long enough to know
that the real problem is in the rest of the system, the conversion of
fuel to electricity (60% at best) the compression of the hydrogen
(70-80%)

Sure and the numbers you suggest are at the very highest end of the range too.

and then.... what have you got? you've got a difficult to
handle, highly dangerous and leak prone fuel, which must then be used
in a 25-30% efficient vehicle in order to accomplish anything.

I entirely agree.

the reason for the EV vehicles is that they go almost directly from grid
to wheels, with no additional losses to speak of, carnot has already
been paid.

Absolutely right. And in the series hybrid, your local generation can match the
average efficiency of grid delivered electricity too.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

I see you're another one of those who received his science education
primarily from "B" sci-fi movies. ;-)

The glowing in the dark bit was artistic licence. ;~)

Graham

 

[R.H. Allen]

---
Poor uninformed stupid ass, from:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1312389

"In 1934, August Magnan and André Sainte-Lague (1) concluded from a
simple mathematical analysis that the flight of bees was
“impossible.”"

You miss a crucial point, though: They didn't say bumblebee flight was
impossible, they said that their *model* of bumblebee flight said it was
impossible. All this meant was that contemporary aerodynamic theory was
inadequate to explain it, and scientists understood that. Faced with
overwhelming evidence that bumblebees can, in fact, fly, no scientist
seriously claimed that they cannot, only that scientists were at a loss
to explain it. See:

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040911/mathtrek.asp

The most relevant paragraph in the piece is:

"The persistence of the bumblebee myth also highlights a
misunderstanding about science, models, and mathematics. The real issue
isn't that scientists can be wrong. The real issue is that there's a
crucial difference between a 'thing' and a mathematical model of the
'thing.'"

 

[BradGuth]

Show me a real 'better idea' instead of one of the joke ideas you've got on the
brain will you ?

In your Yiddish mindset case, there's obviously nothing better than
going along with the usual crapolla flow of whatever your pagan
ExxonMobil god has to say.

Your ideas are neither of these.

You're an ignorant fuckwit who's incapable of doing the calculations to back up
you ideas, instead spewing a load of half-understood nonsense. If could do the
calculations, you'd see that your ideas are absurd, and hugely wasteful and
polluting.

See what I mean. (silly me, as obviously you can't even see nor smell
the cesspool of stay-the-course squat that you're standing within)

BTW, what's your new and improved anything?

BTW No.2, the four passenger VW Lupo if seriously redone at using the
best of proven technology would have provided that kind of everyday
100 empg as is (especially on low sulphur heating oil), and without
ever being the least bit hybrid or running on any of my h2o2.

Obviously that Lupo is no Hummer, in fact a Hummer could pack a Lupo
instead of a spare tire, and it wouldn't hardly know the difference.
- Brad Guth -

 

[Rich Grise]

The glowing in the dark bit was artistic licence. ;~)

You don't get "the Drew Carey show" in the UK, do you? One time,
Drew, Lewis, Oswald, and Kate got irradiated, and, of course,
glowed green in the dark. The joke part was when this cloud of
glowing green gas rose from behind Oswald...

Cheers!
Rich

 

[[email protected]]

That merely shoes how ignorant / uneducated / gullible / stupid / blinkered you are.

Graham

Mercedes said they were going to have a hydroigen powered car in mass
production on the market by 2005.
They made a feined attempt, claimed you needed hydrogen filling stations and
had to carry a hydrogen tank in the trunk, both of which are false, and then
basically stop persuing it.
And that was the party line.

Buses using the hydrogen cell, which did not brun Brown's gas, but merely
converted hydrogen to electricity, which is the most ineficient method of
powering a bus you can imagine, were found to be too expensive to operate.
They made them run on hydrogen in Vancouver, using the Patterson cell.
They are still throwing money at it.
http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2005-2009/2007OTP0057-000539.htm

And everyone knows, that if you burn HHO or Brown's gas or any of those
products, which is produced on demand, then it is safer, and it makes a million
times more energy available to power the vehicle.

You should not be carrying around tanks full of hydrogen under pressure when it
is unnecessary to do so when you can produce Brown's Gas on demand.

The fact that people are ignoring that, shows you that there are political
pressures preventing people from doing that.
Scientific American also clearly stated that well known fact, that Hydrogen
Power Cells are not efficient, when compared to the enormous amount of power
that can be generated by merely separating the oxygen and hydrogen and burning
it as fuel.
So hamstring the process, make it so expensive that it won't be used, and that
is what has been happening.

 

[[email protected]]

The second law of thermos guarantees that you will lose energy in
ANY chemical or physical process.
Electricity production from coal is a chemical/physical process
(60% efficient at best)
Electrolysis is a chemical process. (90-95% efficient)
Compression is a physical process (80% efficient)
combustion is a chemical process (30% efficient)
For a fuel to wheels efficiency of 13%.
Burning the fuel directly in the car is 30% efficient. so
it takes more than twice the original btus of fuel to move the car
using electrolyzed hydrogen compared to direct burning.
By comparison, battery storage on the car gives 60% (generation) -
or a little more than half the btus of fuel for an ev to move the same
mileage.

Let me give you an anology, since everyone is always claiming that burning
Brown's Gas is somehow like perpetual motion.
Well no one says that burning Brown's Gas is anything more than burning gas.

And Brown's Gas is merely another state of water, just like if you compress
propane you will get liquid propane.

So if you take one loaf of bread fresh out of the oven, and you take a giant
loaf of bread and compress it into a brick the same size as the first loaf, and
the fresh loaf you slice a piece of bread, and the second loaf you scrape the
hard bread until you have a pile of bread cumbs of equal weight to the sliced
bread, how in your insane mind can you compare apples and oranges and make any
claims that the 2nd law has been violated by doing that?

 

[[email protected]]

They couldn't if they had fixed wings. But they seem to have learned
a trick - they FLAP them! Imagine your surprise!

(Hint - a helicopter can't fly if its rotor isn't rotating.)

If your water-powered car is such a great idea, just build one and
show us!

Good Luck!
Rich

http://www.fuelfromh2o.com/customtrimlinemaxi.html

 

[[email protected]]

http://www.fuelfromh2o.com/customtrimlinemaxi.html

So there you have it, people using it in many many companies all over the
world as a fuel enhancement system, and the next step is to just up the
production of Brown's Gas by increasing the efficiency, and turn off the gas
intake to the carburetor.

But since these principles are so simple, and the whole thing so well known,
expect hefty law suits, when you sell a bill of goods to a provincial
government when they find out you have been lying to them regarding Brown's
Gas.
Expect fraud charges, expect to be hunted down and prosecuted, expect to
lose your jobs for incompetence, etc.

 

[Eeyore]

[email protected] says...


Mercedes said they were going to have a hydroigen powered car in mass
production on the market by 2005.

A stupid idea. Hydrogen is a poor fuel.

They made a feined attempt, claimed you needed hydrogen filling stations

Of course you do.

and had to carry a hydrogen tank in the trunk,

Of course you do.

both of which are false,

They're TRUE.

and then basically stop persuing it. And that was the party line.

Entirely sensible attitude.

Buses using the hydrogen cell, which did not brun Brown's gas, but merely
converted hydrogen to electricity, which is the most ineficient method of
powering a bus you can imagine, were found to be too expensive to operate.

You're full of crap. A hydrogen fuel ceel is much more efficient that an ICE
burning hydrogen. Approx 50% efficiency vs 20%.

But hydrogen is too expensive and it all currently comes from fossil fuels anyway.
It'll never be a practical fuel.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

And everyone knows, that if you burn HHO or Brown's gas or any of those
products, which is produced on demand, then it is safer, and it makes a million
times more energy available to power the vehicle.

Everyone knows no such thing.

You're talking NONSENSE.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

And Brown's Gas is merely another state of water, just like if you compress
propane you will get liquid propane.

Complete garbage.

You need to learn some SCIENCE.

Graham

 

[Rich Grise, Plainclothes Hippie]

.

Expect fraud charges, expect to be hunted down and prosecuted, expect to
lose your jobs for incompetence, etc.

Expect to get treatment for your paranoid schizophrenia...

Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

http://www.fuelfromh2o.com/customtrimlinemaxi.html

What the hell is this? A tank that makes bubbles? Let's see the
car that "runs on water".

Of course you can't produce anything, because it's been proven impossible
innumerable times in the last few centuries.

Good Luck!
Rich

 

[Eeyore]

the next step is to just up the production of Brown's Gas by increasing the
efficiency, and turn off the gas
intake to the carburetor.

Modern cars don't use carburettors. Carburettors are hopeless for fuel
efficiency.

Graham