The Museum of Hoaxes
hoax archive hoax archive hoax archive hoax archive hoax archive
   
Water-Fueled Car
image Earth2012 this month announced the launch of a major new project: they're going to build a water-fueled car. And they're soliciting donations to help them achieve this ambitious dream. Of course, a water-fueled car might raise a few skeptical eyebrows, but Earth2012 says the science behind their project is all very sound. The tank of their car will be filled up with water, but the water will then be converted onboard into hydrogen. So it's really a hydrogen-powered car, not a water-powered one. And hydrogen-powered cars, of course, already exist.

What makes my hoax detector start ringing when I read about their project is their description of the onboard water-to-hydrogen conversion process. From what I understand, it takes quite a bit of energy to separate water into hydrogen and oxygen. This has always been one of the major stumbling blocks on the road to a hydrogen economy (the cost of producing hydrogen). But Earth2012 says that it has developed a 'revolutionary way of creating hydrogen from water.' This involves vibrating the water at exactly the correct frequency, thereby causing the water to easily separate into oxygen and hydrogen.

Maybe Earth2012 really has developed this revolutionary new process, though the details they provide about it are awfully sketchy. But it all sounds an awful lot like a water-as-fuel hoax, of which there have been many in the past... one of the weirdest being Guido Franch's claims back in the 70s that he had developed a cheap green powder that, when added to water, transformed the water into gasoline. Franch gave a few demonstrations of his powder, though never under scientifically controlled conditions, and his credibility took a bit of a blow when he confessed that the secret of the powder had been given to him by a group of spacemen from the planet Neptune. The Straight Dope has an article about Franch if you're interested in reading more about him.

Update: Parazyte has provided a link to an article (in English) about Daniel Dingel, a Filipino man who claims that he invented a water-powered car back in 1969. The rest of the site is in German, but click here to see a video of Mr. Dingel driving around in his watercar.
Free Energy
Posted by The Curator on Mon Jul 12, 2004
A lot of people are vey skeptical about on board on demand hydrogen reactor. I have been experimenting with it 3 months ago. I believe it will work. but not on just 12volts battery alone,you need to step up the voltage by using an inverter to invert power to 220volts ac then reconvert it again to dc that will give you around 300 plus volts dc enough to separate h2 and Oxygen. It works on my 4 stroke scooter,Im planning to build a more bigger reactor that would fit into my car. Skeptics are arrrogant people, does not know what their talking. Centuries ago stupid people thought that they are very smart and said the world is flat. They were wrong after all.
Posted by Jam Sacueza  in  Philippines  on  Wed Mar 01, 2006  at  04:32 AM
Centuries ago stupid people thought that they are very smart and said the world is flat. They were wrong after all. - Jam

And intelligent people know that the shape, and roughly the diameter, of the Earth was worked out over 2000 years ago. But don't let stupidity stop you.
Posted by Charybdis  in  Hell  on  Wed Mar 01, 2006  at  10:47 AM
In Fact during the the mid of the 13th century King Henry the 5th thought that the world is flat.10 years from now we will be expecting lots of hydrogen powered vehicle. Its no fiction. This year I will be unveiling to the world my new project,same as with Daniel Dingels work. If any one of you knows or related to Dingel pls tell him to sell his technology to any investor he knows with a good offer because there are lots of talented people out there who could do the same project.I respect him because he was the first Filipino to do it. Then here comes Glenn Castillo the second Filipino with the hybrid h2+dieasel. I will be the third. If Dingel does not sell it to the public then history might forgot him. Because he is not the only smart guy out there.
Posted by Jam Sacueza  in  Iriga City Philippines  on  Tue Mar 21, 2006  at  03:23 AM
If King Henry actually did believe this, then he was probably uneducated about the truth. Ever since the ancient Greeks the educated people of the world knew it was round. Having said that, even if he believed he'd been abducted by aliens, it still has no bearing on a hydrogen powered car.

Hydrogen power isn't a myth. It's very possible right now. The problem is that it's not cost effective. It costs more energy to produce the hydrogen then you get back from it, making it an energy sink. It's still more efficient to burn fossil fuels. Until the hydrogen generation problem can be overcome these cars will never become mainstream.

Additionally, right now all hydrogen cars are extremely expensive to produce. Granted, with mass production that cost will drop significantly, but it will be a long time, if ever, before they approach the cost of a fossil fuel car. Then there are the maintenance issues that haven't even been addressed yet. How much does it cost to keep such a car running for 5 to 10 years?
Posted by Charybdis  in  Hell  on  Tue Mar 21, 2006  at  12:13 PM
I was to understand that this device actually 'splits' water in a process that is unexplainable by our current science and physics understanding. The spark plugs are replaced with water splitters and instead of fuel water is injected in and split.. converting to hydrogen and oxygen and then burned. But it would put out more energy than what it used.... something to do with zero point energy.
Posted by Matt  on  Mon Apr 10, 2006  at  09:21 AM
"Man will never be able to fly, and anyone that claims it is possible should be confined to an insane asylum!" Yeah, right! Tell that to all the aircraft manufacturers out there! It is amazing how many people cannot believe in what they don't see with their eyes! It takes faith -- which is why so many are headed straight for hell immediately after this life! They refuse to believe in God because they can't see Him, even though evidence abounds all around them! It really is true -- only God can make a tree! Just remember, God invented di-hydrogen oxide (water) too! Do you suppose He knows any energy-efficient ways of taking it back apart?
Posted by Ed  in  Indiana USA  on  Sat Apr 22, 2006  at  02:43 PM
translation on http://www.wasserauto.de/html/daniel_dingel.html


In the spring 2000 the water car came several times in the Philippine television. To 12.8.99 an article in the Philippine DAILY Inquirer appeared (likewise a further article with photo to 26.08.99). According to a Philippine television report at the beginning of 2001 is to begin series production on the Philippinien. Large concerns such as VOLKSWAGEN likewise already called on DIN gel (over evtl. To buy up patents and put on ice? ; -)

Stefan hard man (http://www.overunity.com) led in the middle of 2000 a very interesting telephone interview with Daniel DIN gel, in which this describes its career/development and its future plans. Wolfgang Czapp, which turned own 5 minutes video over DIN gel water car, reports that DIN gel uses particularly coated electrodes, in order to prevent a high current flow and a corroding of the electrodes.

Wolfgang Czapp: Thus the water car functions: It makes nevertheless not so complicated! Water cars run not with explosion of the detonating gas, but with implosion of compressed ether energy. Proofs: The engine will cold, and runs with very much preignition, it could never with the small quantity detonating gas run. Daniel Dingles water car: The reactor is a faradaeischer cage. In it a normal electrolysis with 12 V and 5 Amper is carried out. Around the electrolysis unit is a swinging coil of only few turns. This coil swings in resonance with the ether energy. This energy is back-reflected by the edelstahlbehaelter into the inside, and gives thus strengthens the Engie on the electrolysis off. The detonating gas, which is mixed with exhaust air, shifted with energy, sucks in the engine. After two thirds of the compression procedure the concentrated ether charge is ignited, and condensed in form of a Inplosion. Thus like Daniel DIN gel several times sagte... very simply!!!
Posted by Marj  in  Canada  on  Thu May 25, 2006  at  11:12 AM
I am interested in water as a fuel,and am sure it can be achieved ,as far as breaking the bond between the elements ,i think that electricity is the answer,but also i think the shape and size may be important ,plus if the electrodes can be vibrated perhaps with piezo ,(ultrasonic ) to dislodge the bubbles faster,this may be the key to efficiency ???.
Posted by ken uk  on  Tue May 30, 2006  at  08:42 AM
Vehicle..on demand conversion. Using ultra sonic as a bond H2 breaker may be possible. Bearing in mind that the product may not be H2 but Ortho or Penta hydrogen...I'm not an advocate of water powered cars regardless of the 'testimonial" avaliable. The energy content in Hydrogen remains much lower that the same equiv. of gasoline or propane...do the math then do a little experimenting on a small scale..avoid using caustics as catalysts...Dan
Posted by Dan Nichols  in  Texas  on  Tue May 30, 2006  at  10:21 PM
Hi out there !

First I have to say that I've studied chemistry and therefor understand just a little bit of physics and chemistry.

And of course I'm a very sceptical fellow !
So eg I couldn't believe the lifter device
(flying construction) but after rebuilding that
device I was able to verify that it indeed works !

Now to the so called "watercar":
After some calculations, a normal car (2Liter engine) at 3000RPM would need the separation of 0.38 liter H2O per minute to gain the same energy as with gasoline (isooctane was used for this calculation) (eg. 2kJ per round).
This would provide about 42.4g of H2 per minute, and 0.158 liter H2 per round. As 0.158 liter in totaly 2 liters are 7.91% the H2/Air mixture in the engine would be able to explode (over 4% minimal H2 needed for an explosion) and provide the same power as with gasoline.

If you make the same calculation for the minimal H2 needed for combustion (4%), you will get an amount of aprox. 0.2 liter of H2O needed for separation each minute. The resulting power of the engine would be only half of that of a gasoline driven engine (but for sure would be enough to drive around).

Now, for every guy out there that have ever done a labor-scaled electrolysis by himself, it is clear that is nearly impossible to electrolyse 0.2 liter of water (and 0.38 liter of water would be even harder) in just ONE minute!

This electrolysis would take so much energy, that
it would draw down every car mounted battery so fast, that you would probably only drive that car out of the garage and the battery would be nearly empty.

Now comes the main clue:
The hole watercar device would be only possible if it is realy true that there exists some devices which are able to "gather" some energy not only from battery, but from an unknown source (eg. surrounding air heat, or "free energy").

At this point it is hard to belief as scientist that such devices are possible, although there are many devices out there that claim to do exactly that (eg. Joes Cell, Brown Gas, Bingo Fuel etc.)

After I've taken a closer look on all of this devices (as I did for the lifter too) it's clear to me, that I can only belief by building up such a device myself.

Through mail contact with Jean-Louis Naudin
I've tried to figure out which device would be the most promising one, so I decided to build a Binge Fuel device for myself.

Take a look at the following experiment:
http://jlnlabs.imars.com/bingofuel/html/bfrcl.htm

The used BingoFuel cell was able to deliver about 3.7kW through a 5HP electric generator, and the cell needed only 2.5kW to run.

Although the Bingofuel device provides enough H2 to power the 5HP generator, this experiment should run much longer to prove the "gathering" of some other energy (overunity).

So I'll build one of this devices myself.

I'm still not sure that such devices are functional, but the above experiment (see link)
is very promising !

Cheers ! Claude Steiner
Posted by Claude Steiner  in  Switzerland  on  Fri Sep 08, 2006  at  09:39 AM
for all you skeptical people out there, Please down load The Free Energy Secrets avi, presented by Dr Peter A. lindemann. and please also do some research on Nicola testla - This guy's innovations and patents are something you use every day " Schlemiel in The real world (And not that stupid MTV show) on Sun Jul 03, 2005 at 11:34 PM" if you do not have this information you will remain ignorant. You can find this video on eDonkey2000 or isohunt.com or a simple search on the internet. enjoy
Posted by RedOne  in  London  on  Thu Nov 02, 2006  at  11:13 AM
No offense but all these inventors and scientists who claimed have invented free-energy or water-powered devices remind me of Dr. Frankenstein.
Trying to animate dead things with big scare contraptions and monstrosity of lightning energy.
Or those yester centuries imagineers who envisioned flying crafts as simply ocean ships lifted into the air.

My advice: leave quantum mechanic, particle physics to the professional ones. Frankly they are too fine for your frankenstein looking glass.
Posted by NonSkeptic  on  Wed May 02, 2007  at  06:10 PM
The biggest problem with this is that electricity is needed to split the water to hydrogen and oxygen. The car would work but the battery will soon run out . You would basically have an electric car.

The only way a hydrogen-powered car would have a lower cost of operation than a gasoline-powered car is if the hydrogen can be split apart at low cost. There are places where hydrogen can be mass-produced cheaply- they are near fast-flowing rivers or hydroelectric dams. The relative scarcity of such places is one reason hydrigen production is expensive.

In summary, unless you live next to a fast flowing river, you will not have a cheap source of hydrogen.
Posted by Michael Ejercito  in  Long Beach, California  on  Wed May 30, 2007  at  02:08 AM
Um, hydrogen can be stored and transported. If it could be mass-produced as efficiently as gasoline it could be distributed more or less the same.

I assume the reason for producing it onboard is the perceived danger large amounts of hydrogen pose. I'm not sure if it's really that much more dangerous than gasoline in storage and transportation, though I admit to not being familiar with the more tricky aspects of hydrogen.
Posted by Charybdis  in  Hell  on  Wed May 30, 2007  at  11:21 AM
Hey, why couldn't someone use an ignition coil out of a car to generate the high voltage, and a microcontroller to pulse the device on/off at 15khz? just an idea.
Posted by CJ  in  USA  on  Mon Oct 29, 2007  at  02:51 PM
4.5 volts d.c. + 300 milliamps @ 960Hz + basic stainless electrodes = Oh my God!-Hydoxy! and lots of it.....
Posted by Killerhuaale  in  Far FAR Away........  on  Thu Nov 01, 2007  at  11:02 AM
yo.... yo.. yo.... wouldn't you be able to run a car on water if you used electricity to separate the hydrogen from water?? because i have done it and it will burn. But ya couldn't you channel that hydrogen through an engine if you rebuilt the pistons and cylinders to cooperate with making the hydrogen combust and put off energy?? Im really interested in this so if you actually want to have an intelegent conversation with me and not just give me your opinion e-mail me at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Posted by stephemmm  in  the good spot  on  Fri Nov 23, 2007  at  12:57 AM
The water powerd engine is rediculous. The problem is to spot the trick. I believe that Dingle takes gas like clean propane in hidden tanks to power the engine. All the "experts" look about the huddle of tubes and pipes, puzzling about the "secrets" of the mysterious machine.
No "smell of combustion", only waterdrops leaves the exhaust. That's what yields.
Posted by xicht  in  Germany  on  Thu Dec 20, 2007  at  08:53 AM
it is possible to use water as fuel. the proper elecritricity (volts, amps, pulse) and the right stainless steal plates produces enouph gas to power and internal combustion engine. i know there are alot of scams out there but i also know that some inventors did invent an effficent way to split H2O. im building one myslef. about half way done. i have a few ebooks on how to build your own. lt and defanatly worth it considering the gas prices no-a-days its not difficult if anybody wants the books i could email then to you. .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Posted by val  in  denver  on  Wed Jan 02, 2008  at  10:56 PM
I really think this can work. I think its been suppressed by the government to keep screwing us with taxes. Anyway, does anyone have a high voltage device for sale? thanks .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Posted by CJ  in  USA  on  Thu Jan 03, 2008  at  11:08 AM
its not about the high voltage (extra voltage= extra heat) in some cases 1.24 volts is enouph but the more current that flows though the electrodes the more gas will be produced. its a few factors.
Posted by val  on  Thu Jan 03, 2008  at  09:46 PM
Hydrogen, and or, OxyHydrogen, pound for pound...is 10 times more powerful than gasoline and if you mangage your fluid dynamics and ignition timing correctly (remove any restrictions like carbs or throttle body, advance the timing to TDC...) PRESTO ! you can make any ICE run on H. I think the only real roadblock now is producing a positive pressure controllable flow from on-demand production. People are improving fuel efficiency by 200% and some backyard dudes are running thier engines on Joe cells alone (which technically requires no energy to operate)
Posted by Joe  in  FLorida  on  Fri Jan 11, 2008  at  01:35 AM
How about its all wrong. The law of thermodynamics was NOT written at a time when radio and SOUND were even properly understood. People rant and rave about losses here and losses there and electrolysis wont work here.... GET A FUCKING BRAIN PEOPLE... water is a conductor.. you can use RESONANCE to make a MIST.. look at a fucking piezo NEBULIZER... now do you think it would be easier to stick electrodes in a large liquid "conductor" or to hit water vapor with an IONIZING potential of 5000 volts or more..its a change in surface area... the same reason a grain bin blows up... voltage is RADIATION... AMPERAGE IS HEAT... if you stick electrodes into a big liquid conductor you will LOSE too much HEAT/amps... and then on top of that regular electrolysis DOES still create steam AND vapor.. so even that could be further ionized... a water/hydrogen on demand process works.... electrolysis will not... you need to use either mechanical motion to create a mist or heat... even boiling a pot of water on a stove is electrolysis... just HIGH AMPERAGE low voltage....think about that. Im a security gaurd for an energy company... you guys think you pay for electricity or pay for meetings where 60 year old guys sit around eating donuts and talking about their money? Sure linemen are out doing the legwork and plant operators are doing their part but they dont even know who Nikola Tesla was... that says a lot when you REALLY think about it. But wait a minute I must be just too crazy for everyone... I mean we did land on the moon because yes there is gravity on it and none of it was a hoax... everyone go about your daily business... just like after 9/11 when bush just told us all to go back to watching tv and shopping... OH and I am an Iraq Veteran. C 1/39 FA (MLRS)... was there for the invasion. Oh and if you think that the gas would "explode" because you have an ionizing potential inside a closed environment you are wrong... what is the charge of H and O.. - and + right.. so if you use a negative potential you will forcibly push the oxygen away.. the same feeling (but more powerful) as when you get closer and closer to the screen on a television and it pushes your shirt,hair, etc......
Posted by Matt Gill  on  Tue Feb 12, 2008  at  02:25 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLKExuHlQMQ

GM has a water fueled car, and they have had it for over ten years. tongue wink
Posted by Mike  in  minnesota  on  Wed Feb 13, 2008  at  09:28 PM
yes it does take elecricty to seperate water into hydrogen and oxygen. cars currently run on gasoline and oxygen. so hydrogen and oxygen would make a good fuel. Now if there was only a way to get a car to generate electricity!?!???!???
OH that's right a magneto, or an alternator, and some batteries....you guys are idiots for thinking this is far fetched.
as for freezing....some sort of chemical like what is put in a radiator---ANTI_FREEZE
OR
the other part of electrolisis is SALT and yes that lowers waters freezing point!!!
and somebody mentioned that the water would put out a fire if there was a car wreck---the fire would have to come from the other car, cause one carrying water and converting it only as needed, to drive electric motors would not catch fire.
but it was a good point that if you hit a gasoline car then it would help extinguish the other guys car.
pray for rain honey, i need to fill the car up!!!
Posted by john lee  in  nashville  on  Tue Feb 19, 2008  at  08:59 AM
I have no problem with the concept of using hydrogen/oxygen to make a car more efficient, however using water as a fuel (when refering to seperating its component parts as part of the overall efficiency calculation) is utter rubbish, and it breaks one of the most fundamental law of physhics we have - entropy, it aint possible.

Fact : Water is at a far less energetic state than free hydrogen gas and Oxygen gas are (after all, it is just hydrogen and oxygen that has already 'reacted' to bond together into water in the first place!) and has also bonded with H-H bonds which additionally makes it even harder to seperate again...

Fact: it takes significant energy to break [hydrogen bonds], and the H-O bonds in water.

Fact: The amount of energy required to break the bonds is the same - it doesnt matter if you use electricity or ultrasonic or any other 'magic method', you still have to break the bonds, still takes the same energy.

Fact: The amount of energy liberated when Hydrogen is burnt in air, will always be less than that required to seperate the bonds in water in the first place.

i.e it cannot ever be used to produce a net gain in energy, perpetual motion is impossible! The sooner the human race realises that the better.

Otherwise The universe would be getting hotter not colder - Simple entropy my friends!


Fiction: The claims that people are driving cars powered ONLY by water - They just haven't told you about the power stored in the batteries, or the extra energy input into the system, (your mobile phone is pretty efficient if you don't count the charger!)

.. People still beleive in UFO's Fairies and Ghosts, doesn't make it true you know!!
Posted by Dr mack  in  UK  on  Thu Feb 21, 2008  at  08:10 AM
everything in the internet tells something about mr. daniel dingel. but please send us any info. or contacts where he is.

tnx
Posted by Robert  in  caloocan philippines  on  Sun Apr 20, 2008  at  08:33 PM
I'd like to agree with Dr Mack and attempt to strengthen the argument by breaking it down... if I can get some contributions to strengthen it further that would be great... ideally I'd like to keep all but the most basic science out of the argument.

1: The energy needed to get hydrogen out of water is more than the energy you can get from the hydrogen created.

2: If you agree with statement 1 then it follows that a car cannot run on only water because the energy needed to get hydrogen from water has to come from somewhere other than the hydrogen created by the process.

3: A car
Posted by Dan  in  WAGGA WAGGA  on  Wed May 07, 2008  at  02:30 AM
Hi,

Though that all you guys would like to look at this video from Channel 9 - Today Tonight Australia 9 June 2008? Also reported is a diffent system on Channel 10 Late News - Australia 12 June 2008

Aussie Brothers Run Car on Water:
http://au.todaytonight.yahoo.com/video#

Raises some interesting questions?

Regards,
KH
Posted by KEith Harris  in  Australia  on  Fri Jun 13, 2008  at  02:29 AM
Well, just a bit of a question to you quarelling guys? What if water as fuel really is true? What do you think are its implications? Would life be better? Or would life be worse due to the change? I'm new to this thread so I hope you guys would be nice and considerate to me... Tnx!
Posted by Noypi29  in  Philippines  on  Tue Jun 17, 2008  at  12:00 AM
Comments: Page 2 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3 > 
Commenting is no longer available in this channel entry.
All text Copyright © 2014 by Alex Boese, except where otherwise indicated. All rights reserved.