UN award Epoch Energy for making a product which cannot possibly work

downloadThe UN’s Energy Globe Award for 2010 in the catorgy for “Air” went to the Epoch Energy Technology Corp. for developing a “dual fuel system for buses and trucks” – this dual fuel system is a carbon copy of the HHO run-your-car-on-water-scam which has been kicking about for decades, it is scientific  nonsense and cannot possibly work.

The first this to point out about this “technology” is that it is not “dual fuel” at all – there is one source of energy here, the petrol/diesel. The second fuel is not a fuel at all but a way of inefficiently extracting energy from the first fuel and storing some of that energy for use later while loosing some of the primary energy… this results in more energy being used up than would have been consumed if you left the engine alone… so it consumes more fuel not less.

Does this sound like a green product to you? Clearly it is nothing of the sort.

globeSadly this is yet another example of a non-scientist finding something exciting to give a science award to, while neglecting to check whether or not the product actually works.

[See my blog posts on Oil Drum Limited for an example of what happens when non technical people hand out prizes for innovation in technology.]

On the Energy Globe web site it says that:

Epoch Energy Technology of Taiwan has developed a technology that enriches fuels with oxy-hydrogen gas. [So it it is "enriched fuel" now, not duel fuel?]

The goal of this development is to reduce emissions [fail] via environmentally friendly oxygen and hydrogen[fail] and thereby to protect the environment [fail] and the health of city residents fail].

The high efficiency [reduced efficiency] of these gases can [cannot] reduce [increase] fuel consumption and emissions by some 15% [it claims 23% in the literature they sent me].

On Epoch’s own publicity material it clearly states that there EPC-100 and EPC-50 “will reduce fuel consumption and carbon emissions”.

Bullshit. This is simply not true and the company cannot have any evidence that it is true. If it were true it would violate the first and second laws of thermodynamics, since energy has to be conserved this product cannot work.

According to Epoch “fuels savings may vary across different brands and models” which is another way of saying “if you find that it does not work then it is your car’s fault, not that our technology being bogus”.

I have asked them to be specific about which makes and models they have found the EP-C50 to work better with, and which work less well, but they refuse to be specific…

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” said Carl Sagan. Epoch Energy’s claims are most certainly extraordinary, I grantee that they have no decent evidence whatsoever.

Epoch Energy Technology Corp beat the City of Ann Arbor LED Streetlight Program and Malmö Environment Department for the 2010 Energy Globe Award. Presumably they are both worthy winners, I wonder what they make of loosing the award to Epoch ’s pseudo scientific crap?

Epoch themselves appear to want the world to think they are a renewable energy company. All Epoch sell which is “renewable” looks to be a few solar PV gizmos, a micro wind turbine, some inefficient Chinese evacuated tube water heaters and the oxy-hydrogen rubbish (which, even if it worked, would not be an example of renewable energy)

They have a US distributor who also thinks the small matter of whether the product works or not is a non-issue. Peter J. Crunk of HHO Gas Technology thinks that the burden of proof is on me to show that the product does not work (which is of course a logical fallacy) rather than them to show that it does work.

I was conversing with Peter on his website but he has stopped approving my comments so you can’t read them. If Peter would like to comment on this post he is welcome to, I won’t censor him, but somehow I don’t think he will.

I have also been in communication with William Huang Tinglef of Epoch themselves.

William says “we do not advertise the product as fuel saving” which is completely untrue. To quote from their website, “fuel consumption and carbon emissions are reduced”. It is also on their promotional videos and on the promotional material they sent me. It is true that they can’t stick to a figure for how much fuel you could save, but fuel saving is obviously their number one selling point.

William also sent me a paper on “Effect of H2/O2 addition in increasing the thermal efficiency of a diesel engine” carried out by Bari & Esmaeil in 2008. You can download it by clicking the icon on the right.

The key criticism of Bari & Esmaeil’s experiment is that “the H2/O2 mixture was generated using 24 V external power supply”. This means that it is not a closed system and the laws of thermodynamics do not apply, an unspecified amount of extra energy is being introduced into the system and not accounted for. There are several reasons to dismiss this experiment and its conclusions as garbage, but this is more than enough reason on its own.

Also note that in the several years that have elapsed since publication of Bari & Esmaeil’s experiment and yet no one has ever followed up on their findings, no car makers have every brought it out as a feature – this speaks volumes to me (but maybe you see it as proof of a conspiracy theory).

Hundreds of HHO sellers cite Bari & Esmaeil’s experiment as proof that HHO works and yet no one else took any notice of it at all.

William pretty much ignored all of the questions I have so far asked him, he has yet to show me anything about any testing of Epoch’s products, by whom, when, what methodology, what blinding, what controls, what results and what conclusions. Why? I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure it is because no one has ever done any.

William says that Epoch are “not able to achieve consistent fuel savings across all models”, but I am asking what results they have achieved on what models, not so much why they are not consistent.

To put another way – on what basis are Epoch making the claims that they do? Because I strongly suspect they have none.

And if Epoch have no proof that their product does any of what they claim it does then why have the UN decided to award them for it?

Unfortunately, I can find no answer to this other than to assume it is because they are imbeciles.



  1. nunya biznes:

    you are a moron, its based on the process of browns gas. electrolosis. the use of a positive plate and a negative plate place in water, now some instances people utilize baking soda to help the reaction, but i have seen this done, and maybe you need to explore youtube because there are hundreds of videos of people who have done this with their vehicles. the dual fuel by the way, is a mix of hydrogen and oxygen, the separation of H20 and carbon fuel.

  2. Jon:

    That is right “nunya biznes” I am a moron, I have no idea what Brown’s Gas is, or electrolysis, and I don’t consider YouTube a verifiable source of good quality, unbiased, scientific information. However I do know when to use caps and apostrophes. Good luck.

  3. Z5:

    Oh dear,

    I suppose turbo chargers or super chargers can’t work either because they take energy from the engine to increase the combustion of fuel…


  4. Jon:

    Dear “Z5″,
    For someone selling this nonsense you are remarkably ill informed, you should know something about your chosen field of expertise. Turbos and super chargers take energy from the engine and use it to ram more air and more fuel into the engine, this results in more power being available and more fuel burned. And anyway, what do they have to do with HHO? Nothing, that is what. Talk about red herrings. Why don’t you show the world one bit of evidence that HHO works, eh? I’ll tell you why you don’t, it is because you can’t, because it does not work.

  5. critical skeptic:

    In this rant you state that the generator goes against the first and second law of thermo-dynamics. Please clarify, that’s some statement to make without going into any detail.
    Have you ever used one of these generator in a vehicle? I have and I did get better gas mileage.

  6. Jon:

    Dear “critical skeptic”,
    The first law of thermodynamics states that you can’t get more energy from a system than you put in, the second states that you cannot even break even. If HHO worked then there would be more energy extracted from the system, the engine, than was put in – you would be putting in X amount of fuel-energy and getting X+1 fuel-energy out. This is silly and obviously wrong.
    But now you are going to bombard me with pseudo-scientific nonsense about “flame speed” or something that neither of us really know anything about, right? Don’t bother. There is no point trying to show how it could work when no one has ever show it does work. That is putting the cart miles ahead of the horse.
    The point is that there is no evidence that this works, in fact every time (that I know of) that it has been tested under controlled conditions it has never been shown to improve anything. The test results I have here (scientific, controlled and blinded) in fact show more than a 3% decrease in MPG – HHO makes things worse.
    Please show me any decent evidence that there is something to this because I have never seen anything that comes close.

  7. Critical skeptic:

    First of all, please do not presume what I do or do not know. Secondly HHO generators are not about creating more energy than is in a system. They are about reducing petrol consumption by displacing traditional fuel (i.e. gasoline) with HHO that is produced at the point of use. Thus decreasing the amount of petrolium being used.

    Still you have yet to answer if you have ever personally tried one of these devices.

  8. Jon:

    Dear “Critical Skeptic” (you don’t appear to be being very critical or very skeptical),
    This is not about how HHO saves fuel, that is putting the cart before the horse, first we need to establish if HHO works. And no one has ever done that in a lab. On one had we have a load of anecdotes saying that it does work, and some lab work in the other saying that it did not work for the scientists (maybe HHO is anti-science and refuses to cooperate in the presence of scientists?).
    There is no point in me trying one of these units myself because I am just as fallible as anyone else. And besides, if i did find it not to work then what would that prove? Nothing, unfortunately. It is the job of the makers of this horseshit to demonstrate that it does work, and they consistently dodge that because they are con men and it does not work.

  9. Critical Skeptic:


    I am critital of skeptics, especially those who critize without first hand knowledge. Trying one of these generators for yourself will prove to you that the mpg is improved. Get a good one though I will admit there are a lot of crack pot ones out there.

  10. Jon:

    Dear Critical Skeptic,
    It would appear that you did not read any of what I wrote… what a massive waste of my time…

  11. phoenix:

    Jon: We suggest you go to http://www.selfmade.hk . Their physical address and
    E-mail,phones/fax information is available,plus the data,certificates of compliance and patents for EPOCH.
    The electrolizers do generate HHO,but to achieve good results you must take electronic control of the vehicles CPU and MAF sensors.

  12. Jon:

    The link you sent is in Chinese. Great. Google Translate did not reveal any evidence whatsoever that the product works.
    Please point me in the direction of any robust scientific testing of this product. It is such obvious nonsense that nothing short of this is acceptable.

  13. JEAN:


  14. Kevin:

    Don’t all fuel systems produce less energy than they consume? I guess the question for me is does an HHO system produce an alternative or additive to gasoline / diesel that may be cheaper or less dependent on gasoline / diesel? I know there is no way to overcome thermodynamics. Thats a given. Companies can claim what they want. The proof is in the pudding and what kind of pudding are you looking for?

  15. Jon:

    Hi Kevin,
    Yes, all systems consume more energy than they produce. This is the second law of thermodynamics. One idea for how HHO “works” (it does not work) is that it is making supplementary fuel so that you use less petrol/diesel. The problem is that the HHO machine gets its energy from somewhere, and that is from the petrol/diesel… to save fuel the HHO machine would have to be more than 100% efficient, since no system is even 100% this means that an engine will consume less fuel with the HHO machine switched off.
    As I have said before; the proof is not in the pudding, it is in the science lab. In a lab you can control for the experimentator’s bias and for uncertainties in measurements, things you can’t do in a “real world” test.
    There are two types of people selling these things, those who know that it does not work and those that mistakenly believe that it does.

  16. JOSE:


  17. Kent Doering:

    Dear Jon: HHO works as an excellent enhancement to gasoline and diesel because it gets them to burn much more efficiently. I and others have been conducting kilowatt to output tests with both Epoch and Koren B.E.S.T. brown´s gas “hydrogen dry cell technologies”. The standard kilowatt to gas production rate with both of these Asian systems is about l kWh => 260 liters an hour of inflammable hho.

    We have experimented with titanium electroplating on nickle-stainless that boosts performance. In addition, adding a Meyers circuit HVDC pulsed at plus 42.000 kHz boosts output. /There is some sort of “efficiency barrier” around 40.000 kHz frequecy which pushed generation even higher. We have also found that first running the current through piezos- generating an ultra-sonic sound in addition to the current further boosts hho output per input kWh.

    We modified a VW-Lichtblick 20 kWh CHP unit by adding a set of Stirling motors on the heat exhausts before they go into the heat exchangers, to achieve an extra 4 kWh of power out of the system merely by hybrid heat recapture systems. Running that extra 4 kWh into a modified BEST watr torch- puts out close to 1 cubic meter of highly inflammable hho an hour… and it suffices to run the installation using collected runoff, rooftop rainwater. It was our financial risk.

    The tear out of the old heating oil unit on the combined residential-commercial building unit and replacing with the VW – Lichtblick unit, cost about €20.000 after deducting the €3.500 German subsidies for CHP. The modified Water Torch system from Korean B.E.S.T. browns gas- was another 5000. Then there were the costs of steam cleaning the old oil tanks, and electro-painting them. These tanks are hooked up to a rooftop runoff rainwater hook up, and include filters and electro-sterilistion to suppress funghi growth in the tank.

    The total costs of the retrofit ran to over €26.000. The unit displaces over 5.000 liters of heating oil per annum… (summer purchase costs- of about €.80 (80 Euro cents peer liter -) €4.000 in heating oil bills saved p.a..

    The modified water torch system, running off the extra Stirling motor p.g. capacities generates over 600 cubic liters of hho an hour, which suffices to power the 4 cylinder V.W. Golf engine originally tuned to run off methane- natural gas – running at 1.500 r.p.m. – driving the 20 kwh system… and providing heat and hot water to the building when needed/ otherwise the heat is channeled outside in warm weather.
    Saving on power, and feeding back into the grid at lower than solar and wind feed in tariffs also help to amortize the unit.
    We expect the unit to fully amortize inside of three years.

    You unfortunately have never taken the time to actually experiment and do the input kWh to gas output measurements. As stated, both the Epoch Energy and Korean B.E.S.T. browns gas systems have a rated and independently certified input energy to ouput gas ratio of 1 kWh to 260 liters of hho gas per hour. With the right heat recapture technologies, it becomes very efficient in stationary applicatíons – especially hybrid fuel cell /stirling or i.c.e/stirlings in a broad range of applications.

    And, yes, we have done our lab certifications, and are obtaining independent certification by the Fraunhofer society and a Max Planck Research Institute, thank you. If you don´t believe the European automotive industry isn´t seriously looking at hho, it just means you are not familiar with their r & d, departments.

    Take a big ship´s diesel from M.A.N.. There is a lot of excess heat coming out of the only 40% efficient diesel on a ship. And there is plenty of space to do “heat recapture”- feed that onto water cooled Alpha Stirling generators- and feed that power into big, advanced hho systems putting out up 50 m³ per minute, feeding back into the engine. (generated out of electro-catalytically distilled seawater with nano-tube filter fail safe back up systems.)

    HHO is changing the nature of coal fired power generation. Big Stirling units on the back end of a Ranking cycle – 200 mw coal burning power plant – put out an extra “heat recapture” 20 mW. And, that in turn goes to generating what? 5.200 m³ per hour of hho. (The energy only needed to be recaptured. Now, anerobically incinerate the coal with browns gas, and you get hot steam and carbon monoxide, hot, hot so² etc. which can be cleanly mixed with ionized, hot steam, and injected into a big Siemens- gas turbine..doubling the power output of a plant while considerably slashing coal consumption, and cleaning up the power plant emissions in an hho assisted coal burning – GaS upgrade.

    The system is also good for converting coal fired plants to hho assisted, high temperature waste incineration plants… hooked up to an urban long distance, CHP system.

    Helmholtz formulated the 1st and 2nd laws in the mid- 19th century working with only very inefficient, coal fired steam engines as his example. He also postulated a 3rd law of thermodynamics which was violated at the beginning of the 20th century by two ignorant American bicycle mechanics. “Man can never make a heavier than air machine that will fly”.

    HHO systems work, and others are already applying them in industrial and CHP applications in Europe and ASia.

    Oh, and something else about Brown´s gas as it has come to be known. There are a number of sites referring to “all aqeuous vehicles” running off water… the most serious one being in Japan. Right now, the Munich transit authority is testing an HHO unit on one of its city busses with good results. There is a European automotive company that makes race car technologies. One aspect- is simply “plasma ignition”. i.e. high voltage – spark plugs (you need rubber gloves to tune the engine with those. You can see demonstrations of people spraying water onto those high voltage spark plugs and the mist ignites. Steam works just as well with it. Now, you are familiar with Boyle´s law, and how a gas heats up under compression.

    That is the principle behind diesel engines. And, the VDO company markets – air intake microwaving which cut diesel consumption in half. i.e. microwaves on the air intake go through a doppler effect on compression, and that causes micro-wave sonoluminiscence on the hot diesel gasses. Now, what happens if you use brake energy recycling to demineralize water. You get something you can steam on the hot exhaust manifold system to about 250° c. Now, you can run that hot steam through a permanent magnet array, then a neo-dam Yag magnetized pipe, plus a an electro-magnetic ionisatin (system) for radical steam ionisation. Add a dual wave microwave and ultra sonic pulsing pulsed at 44 kHz… and feed the engine.. with both hho through the micro-and ultrasonically pulsed air intake, and 80 radical magnetic ionized steam into the fuel injection system. (With high voltage, racing Plasma ignition system) spark plugs. Now, we are already running a very light, carbon fibre mid-engined race car- weighing only 900 kg in the race version- with a 7 liter turbo charged Ford V8 on board… pushing out 900 BHP. A nice 1 kg to 1 B.H.P. weight to power ratio. Accelleration – 0 – 60 in 2.5 seconds. Top end- 400 kmh or 250 mph. Do continue to tell us all its impossible. That 7 liter bi-turbo- Ford V8, racing tuned to 900 B.H.P. tells a different story.

    Did you know that you can accellerate sound waves above the speed of light in a compression zone. (Prof Stephan Chu expereiemented with tunnel effect accelleration at Berkeley,by the way.) And do you know what happens to hot steam fresh out a Rankine cycle when you use dual magnetron ion thrusters- pushing it and ultrasonic sound waves through an ceramic lined, electro-magnetic “compression zone”. The ultra-sonic pulses pass through the partially recompressed, hotter steam at speeds faster than the speed of light, achieving a hot h²o disassociation- and the stuff comes out igniting inside a turbine along with hho fed into it. hho + mrsi.

    Maybe you could condider upgrading the non-source-free Lullian Bullular model of the atom as others have done, to understand the “non-source-free” plasma state quantum hyrdodynamics behind these developments. Do continue to call it all scam. As I said, both Epoch and Korean B.E.S.T. do have independent lab testing to prove their claims of 1 kWh generating abou 260 liters of hho per hour. Some of the other esoteric stuff coming out is very interesting. Conceptual barriers have been broken like the Wright brothers violated the Helmholtz 3rd law of thermodynamics (Man shall never make a heavier than air machine that can fly.) I think about that on board a five hundred and fifty ton A 380 super jumbo.

    Others are building and installing hho and MRSI systems to cut consumption and increase performance.

    There were reasons why Epoch won the energy prize. Sure I know it goes against your grain. But independent testing at the Fraunhofer and Max Planck Institutes also confirm the current output rate of 1 kWh genreating about 260 liters of hho per hour.

    I`ve driven that carbon fibre experimental – with the 900 HP 7 liter Ford V8 running “aqueous”. And Chinese bus companies are cutting consumption by up to 30% with hho systems, and the Munich mass transit is experimenting with them. And, CHP is still a “small” business. But hybrid CHP units leave enough power to run hho generators… shit… you want certifiable rates of power input to gas output… try 1 kWh for 260 cubic liters of gas. And when you have an input of 2 kWh- and generate plus 520 cubic liters of hho gas an hour… that suffices to drive a four cylinder VW Golf engine at 1500 rpm generating 20 kw… with exhausts driving Stirling heat motors putting out another 2 kw going into the “water torch” hho system.

    Tell me all about how it does not work. Shit, I built a device which uses hho – to feed a fuel cell… for heating purposes…. and put a set of Alpha Stirling motors generating power on top of the heat exhaust system… generating more power. And, voila… the small experimental unit – generates high pulsed HVDC.. going into the hho generators… We´re doing a brewery that way.

    Goodness, Germans also use bio-gas on farms. (building out in addition to wind and solar.) Now, what happens when we put additional stirling motors over the manure methane recaptre fuel cells and generate hho with the additional power… feeding that onto additional fuel cells. (We´ve got the rates up to 400 liters of gas per input kilowatt hour.)

    When you combine hho with MRSPI – magnetic resonance steam plasma igntion systems (high voltage stuff) powered by brake energy recycling… on a 20% hho- and 80% MRSPI – that is enough to power a high performance engine like the Ford 7 liter bi-turbo tuned engine I was talking about, or a Lamborghini Aventador, or Bugatti. (both VW group.)

    I am really not worried about convincing you. The only person I am concerned about convincing at the moment is the grandson of Ferdinand Porsche- who put billions into making a plug in hybrid that gets 240 mpg. (With hho- and mrsi- zero fossil fuel.)

    He was also behind the VW Lichtblick CHP development to replace heating oil units with CHP. (which we are getting to run hho – mrspi system.) 100.000 units in multi-family dwellings will provide 2 GW, the equivalent of 2 nuclear power plants. And getting that to run hho and mrsi was easy. Just drop Stirling motors on the exhaust end before the heat exchangers, and run that through advanced hho generators.. And do you want to tell me that 600 cubic liters an hour is not enough to drive a 4 cylinder VW Golf engine at 1.500 r.p.m.!

    Smaller Sony systems putting out 5 kWh.. can also be equipped with added “Whispergen” stirlings- making it a hybrid system- and when you pump- 1.1 kWh into a Korean B.E.S.T. browns gas water torch system, you get 280 cubic meters of gas an hour, more than enough to power the Sony – Vaillant CHP system. (The water here is once, again, soft, filtered, rooftop runoff rainwater.)

    Goodness, a lot of Americans also denigrate and deride the German “Energiewende”. However, Siemens is doing a good business putting up big 6 mWh wind turbines on the coastlines and offshore in the North Sea for Germany, Holland, Belgium, and France for example. When I got into “renewables” 30 years ago, the max output for wind was 50 kWh per turbine. Now its up to 6 mWh and sometimes even 7.

    Germany just finished installing another 7 MW of rooftop solar. (fancy that.) Proves the sceptics wrong again. There is a massive build out of bio gas systems- urban and agrarian as back up baseline power for that. B.M.W. and M.T.U. deliver some very interesting systems in that area.)

    Goodness, a German physicist I know developed a new form of solar p.v. which pushes the output of installed rooftop solar from 15% efficiency to 43.4 efficiency. Another Prof down at the University of Stellenbush R.S.A. developed something the size of a tablet computer which puts out the equivalent of over 10 square meters of conventional 15% efficient solar, and he received a handsome 8 figure down payment for the patent rights from a major power manufacturer situated in Europe. Advanced solar p.v.. And, that Chinese development for solar heat is also being applied for 24/7 hybrid- geothermic-concentrated solar… i.e. heat pumps pumping up ground heat… running through “concentrated solar” (with special coatings inside the tubes from Schott solar which trap the solar energy) and heating big insulated tanks of water– with Stirling heat difference motors generating power 24/7 (coming in India, China and Africa.)

    Prof. Dr. John Norris in Capetown R.S.A. developed another form of hho generator… with excellent input power to produced gas ratios- which can even use non distilled, normal mineralized water, and even brown water- – for the rapid electrification of Africa using small generator units in areas previously without power. /Google “African.Hydrogen.com)

    As I said, an all aqueous, mid-engined, carbon fibre race car is on its way this season. The race track version is stripped… weighs only 900 kilos. and cranks out 900 BHP from the bi-turbo, tuned 7 itre Ford V8. The street version is heavier, with a bit more “luxury” like the Bugatti. It hits the scale at 1200 kilos- and the tuners get it to crank out 1200 BHP- running both hho and mrspi – (magnetic resonance steam plasma ignition.) (goodness, steam is like loaded with electro-weak infra-red photon energy ain´t it. The trick was in using that for high temperature water disassociation!)

    You make all sorts of claims about lack of lab testing. However, there has been a lot of lab testing in China, Taiwan, Korea, and now Europe. if you don´t think the Asian and European automotive sectors aren´t looking at hho and mrspi, keep up with your wishful thinking. Toyota, the world´s biggest car maker is looking at it.

    Look at hho car in Tokyo. That appearing on you tube woke the Germans up- the VW Group is number two behind Toyota. (So there is an intense “behind the scenes” development going on as I write.)

    When the “m” car I decribed hits the racing circuit, and gets the press it deserves later this year, you will continue to scoff i assume.
    But who cares. TüV, Fraunhofer certification will be coming soon enough, in addition to testing by the Munich Technical University and Munich City College.

    Goodness, once engineers worked out the “aqueous end” of things, they were faced with a lot of other engineering problems such as “winterproofing” systems, in vehicle demineralisation systems, etc, things you never even though about in your “oil barrel” skepticism.

  18. Jon:

    Dear Kent Otho Doering,
    Wow. Just wow. That is the most impressive load of verbose, irrelevant nonsense I have read is a long time; a fantastic example of Proof By Verbosity. Narcissistic Personality Disorder is my best guess.
    Please cite one single reputable source to back up any one “fact” you have written about because I don’t have a clue where to start in pointing out what claptrap it all is.
    Seriously, please pick your most important point (or your favorite point, or just a random point) and lets talk about it.

  19. Rik:

    “Did you know that you can accelerate sound waves above the speed of light in a compression zone.”
    So, to make this work (in theory, not in practice), you have to throw away not just thermodynamics, but also relativity…

  20. 007:

    Re “The key criticism of Bari & Esmaeil’s experiment is that “the H2/O2 mixture was generated using 24 V external power supply”. This means that it is not a closed system and the laws of thermodynamics do not apply, an unspecified amount of extra energy is being introduced into the system and not accounted for. There are several reasons to dismiss this experiment and its conclusions as garbage, but this is more than enough reason on its own.”
    It seems you overlooked the part that states “The power needed to produce the
    H2/O2 mixture is included as an input energy to the engine”
    Re The University Challenged video. I see you made a comment to the effect that over 99.9% of fuel is burned in the engine and its impossible to get more energy out. Really? Can you please explain what a catalytic converter is for and how it generates its heat? Even if it was the case, how the fuel burns affects the usable power output. On the basis that you are right (you aren’t) one has to assume there is no room for engine development and the manufacturers improvements in mpg gained since the program was produced must be scams too otherwise they’d be getting over the 99.9% you refer to. Re the Millbrook tests, were these conducted using the HHO chips used to lean the mixture or simply plugging HHO into the inlet manifold? If the latter I wouldn’t expect any improvement as the ECU will over-compensate but most dealers selling HHO kits these days know that which is why they offer the extra electronic parts. HHO is not intended to be a fuel substitute so the arguments about contravening the laws of thermodynamics are not relevant to the application. The principle is to get more energy out of the fuel per power stroke instead of burning unburned fuel products in the cat. It is not to simply convert water to HHO and then reburn it as a diesel replacement. That wouldn’t make sense. BTW were you aware that HHO units have been applied to production vehicles in Asia?

  21. 007:

    Kent, is it possible to contact me? Do you know how we can do that without opening our details up to the public?

  22. Fliorentinos:

    I used the unit on a 2.1lt turbo nissan sr20det engine with 1000cc fuel injectors and a GT35 – R turbocharger and I made 480 km without the gas indicator turn on and for all the time (nearly about 5 hours trip, I had the air condition on !!! Average speed was around 120- 140 km/hr during all that period !!
    I’m sorry to say that IT IS NOT SCAM !!!!
    Thank you people !!!

  23. Robert:

    HHO is a scam! It is easily proven that it does not work. It’s snake oil for morons! Yes after all the people explaining why it does not work and you still believe it works then you are a MORON!!! It’s is impossible to create a fuel to run an engine at the same time as consuming it. And no running an engine on fuel and using so called HHO to improve fuel mileage does not work either. Stan Meyer never created a water car. It was all BS!

  24. Nikos:

    Dear John,
    I have been watching the hho case, closely and agree with you that most of the products out there are scam category. Two points though on your righteous campaign, from a colleague (as i understand you are a physicist).
    1. There is no involvement of 1st or 2nd law of thermodynamics in disproofing hho claims. Burning fuel in an engine is well below 50% ratio coefficient, so plenty of room for improvement there, without even touching 2nd law(it states that in a closed system useful energy is always lost aka you can not have a thermal transfer from cold to hot without energy input)
    2. HHO Electrolytic Production is out there masqueraded as pure hydrogen production (first they produce hho and then h) by major companies such as Linde for medical purposes etc. So electrolytic production of h is out in the market and definitely not a scam.
    To conclude, there is no bogus science in hho production, the claims for energy savings are to say at the least debatable.
    p.s There is a very interesting and solid paper by Jacob Young in an experiment very nicely organized. Look at it and tell me what you think.

  25. Jon:

    Dear Nikos,

    Thanks for your comment. There are two arguments you make in the support of HHO which are simply not true:
    - The laws of conservation of energy are entirely relevant, HHO claims to be able to get something for nothing and the laws of thermodynamics say that is not allowed.
    - Normal, modern ICEs do not burn 50% of their fuel, they burn upwards of 99% of the fuel, the remainder is burned in the catalytic converter. It is true that the fuel-to-road energy ratio is something more like 50% as so much energy is lost to noise and heat but that is not relevant here as we are talking about the efficiency of the burn inside the engine.

    If you read Jacob Young’s thesys you will see that he does not get the electricity he uses to drive his HHO machine from the engine, he gets it from a “HYelec HY3020E” 12v power supply. This means that it is not a closed system, he is comparing an engine running on diesel to and engine running on both electricity and diesel, for any given engine speed you would expect it to consume less diesel while it has an additional fuel source.

    Yes, electrolytic production of hydrogen is a real thing.
    Yes, hydrogen powered vehicles exist.
    Yes, adding hydrogen to a diesel/petrol engine does result in a decrease in the consumption of the primary fuel, but only if the hydrogen is produced externally (not a closed system).
    When a vehicle is fitted with an on-board hydrogen generator (one source of fuel, a closed system) then no one has ever demonstrated a vehicle that consumes less fuel than a vehicle not fitted on-board hydrogen generator, this is because of the laws of conservation of energy… se my first point.

    HHO cannot work, it is a scam.


  26. Nikos:

    Dear Jon
    Thank you
    ICE engines are thermal engines, therefore second law imposes upper border in efficiency, that of the carnot cycle (no engine has been shown to work above this engine). In an equation Nmax = 1-Tc/Th. Various coefficients in an ICE from 20% (gasoline) to 40 % (diesel), 70 % (hydrogen powered rockets. None of this contradicts 1st law. And it all happens in the burn inside as you say. So is viable in mant ways , in many engines, noone contradicts that.
    Solid remarks on Jacob Young, but i have not checked so far consumption of 12v hydrogen electrolysis machine. to his claims of low loads reduction.

  27. Nikos:

    Dear John. You might find helpful the following for Otto engines
    This is the equation for the Otto cycle efficiency:
    h = 1 – 1/rvg-1
    The compression ratio of the engine is rv. Actually, this is a volume ratio. It is the ratio of the volume in a cylinder when the piston is at the bottom of the cylinder to the volume in the cylinder when the piston is at its top position: rv = Vbottom/Vtop.
    Most auto engines have compression ratios in the 9 to 10.5 range. We note: the higher the compression ratio, the higher the efficiency! The gparameter is the ratio of the specific heats, i.e., the constant pressure specific heat over the constant volume specific heat. In practical terms, the higher the g, the higher the efficiency. A gas such as helium or argon, composed only of atoms, has the highest g possible, 1.67. Room air on the other hand, being mainly composed of O2 and N2 molecules has a g of 1.4. Fuel vapor has g less than that of air. The mixture of air and gasoline vapor inducted into the engine has a g of about 1.35. As this mixture is compressed and heated during the compression stroke, its g drops to about 1.33. Upon combustion (when the piston is near its top position), the fuel is oxidized to CO2 (and some CO) and H2O, and g drops further. It drops into the 1.20-1.25 range. The overall, effective g for the whole cycle for use in the efficiency equation above is about 1.27.

    So i have to insist no thermodynamic laws problem here. It would be crazy , it would mean we can not improve diesel engines.

Leave a comment