GEET Fuel Processor deel 3

This is probably the next step to consider in making hydrogen on demand systems.

The GEET by Paul Pantone works!... it really works!!!

For those who dont understand Dutch... well, that makes most of us - English translations will be available soon.

Time to save the planet - be counted!

UPDATE

In the past months, I have been flying under the radar so to speak; avoiding all forms of contact from the media, politicians or the business people.

But there is one community in this world I cannot avoid nor would I like to avoid. And this is the scientific/ engineering community.

Recently, I was sort of dragged into the Inventors Week expo here in the Philippines by my friend... I was merely there to be his driver... It turned out that he used to be the president of this society. I saw one hydrogen proponent there with a cell (battery type) similar to Dingels. It's just a full bath battery type plate cells. He claims it makes 1LPM - but I didnt see any flow meter. He also have some boards presenting Industrial Applications - although I believe in hydrogen enhancement for combustion - I am still iffy and skeptical for industrial applications to such magnitude.

At any rate, it was quite some field trip. One thing I noticed though, all these Filipino (so-called) 'inventions' are lacking one common factor. They all lack appeal. They also lack a sense of conviction with regards to benefits to humanity as a form of a quick fix with a permanent solution.

This is probably why I hate patenting works - not because of the work required to make a good patent application, but the work needed to prove something to the patent office. In a patent application... only 10% is needed to do the invention... 90% is poured into inventing the presentation. Most of the inventions merely share the same thing inside and out, with only the descriptions and style as well as the name are having a wide spectrum of variance.

At any rate, I also personally do not believe in the term inventions, as the term itself means - creating something new. Is there really something new?... There are only innovations. Innovations means - designing something using ideas or stuff from existing things already. This is as lay as I can go. Of course - WIKIPEDIA can provide a more detailed definition of the aforementioned terms. But my point remains - He who calls himself as an inventor doesn't really know the meaning of this term. Everyone is just an innovator... everything is already invented by a a Prime Origin... GOD. Even Einstein cannot claim he invented the Atom nor the Electrons. All we have is mere imagination, logic and theories. With a mathematical model - after it has been critically scrutinized and evaluated or tested, it becomes a new scientific law. Therefore, nobody is better than anybody... this is not my theory nor my opinion - it's a fact.

In a more recent event, a friend of mine who has believed in me as he have believed in many gifted kids in the past - informed me of a debunking effort against me as a person in the light of my proof of concept experiments for Hydrogen enhancement or HHO applications.

In particular - the HHo enhanced Honda Dio Mileage Test was critically evaluated by the engineering community of CR4 (the engineering website). Of course CR4 has nothing to do with it, the engineers are highly respectable characters in their field and I do and still respect them after this event.

At any rate, to make this short, I responded and I am happy with the results.

The best response I got is this...

Its from Andy:

Ehnriko

Many thanks for taking the time to reply. It's good to have input on this forum from someone who has actually built a unit and experimented with it. From my point of view, your subjective appraisal that the engine is more responsive with the gas, is as indicative of the effect as any of the measurements.

There are various ways of doing meaningful tests and each one has it's advantages and disadvantages. Timing the acceleration to a certain speed at full throttle, measuring the distance taken to achieve a certain speed (at full throttle), timing how long a set amount of fuel lasts at full throttle, timing how long a set amount of fuel lasts at a set maximum speed, measuring the distance achieved from a set amount of fuel at full throttle, measuring the distance achieved from a set amount of fuel at a set maximum speed, etc. Each test will be a combination of various factors including the particulars of the engine and carburettor.

Tying the gas generator into the alternator output is an elegant way of having reduced output at low revs. Simple and effective. Because your unit uses the voltage directly, it is referred to as a "resistive" or "brute force" generator. Not very efficient but clearly effective enough to create a tangible and measurable difference

DC electrolysis produces H2 at one electrode and O2 at the other; AC electrolysis produces a mixture of the two gasses at both electrodes. As you are not keeping the hydrogen and oxygen separate, the gas composition is exactly the same as "Brown's Gas", also known a "hydroxy" and "HHO" (much to the confusion of some members of this forum). What you call it doesn't really matter IMHO.

The effect of the very small amount of hydrogen is to enhance the burn or explosion of the petrol (in your case) so that the fuel is not only burnt more completely but also burns closer to the start of the power stroke. You feel it as a much more responsive but there is not enough energy content to run the engine alone.

Some people misunderstand the whole argument about HHO generators as if it were about adding [significant amounts of] energy into the mix; it's not. A better analogy would be stoking a fire. You can greatly increase the output of a log fire by riddling it with a poker. The amount of energy that you are expending is minimal but the effect can be huge because you improve the way that the fuel burns.

Happy experimenting. Keep us apprised of your results. All the best

Andy




Cheers everyone!

Australia Farm - Lowest Carbon Footprint in the world

This is a reply of one member of the VortexHeatExchanger open source group community which I feel should be worth sharing. It is addressed to the world anyway. Please read on.

All,

This has got the groups VHE conversion (Small engine) and soon will be updated with Ady's/Naresh's Hilux conversion. This has also got info to support Paul Pantone well done guys and to Naresh/ALL what a brilliant group you all are!!.

Sincerely

Ash

Generic post to groups

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4308354470154182905&hl=en

This is the first farm in Australia to have all these technologies working in one place (going to be used for educational purposes). This farm is also the first to have the LOWEST carbon foot print in the world as a result of the implementation of these technologies. There are no other modifications like this which can be done to existing technologies and match this energy efficiency and the pollution cutting attributes.

This has come about as a result of the open source energy community(world first), I must say a personal kudos to all of you working together. We will be presenting these efforts of the open source community on the mainstream media this year, the farm will be ONE template used. Yes the OU technology will also get a mention. This Farm features information for technical people and the MAINSTREAM audience.

Technologies featured:

Roto Verter (energy saving and OU R and D)
GEET/SPAD
Hydroxy
SOLAR Bedini technology/Imhotep
HEMP awareness.

The re loaded versions will have updates on the GEET/VHE diesel ute and the HEMP production growing that the non profit org is doing there in the near future. Also we will be doing educational Algae Bio fuel production there (course coming soon). The Farm will also be used for Orgone experiments to help validate the science for the mainstream ethos. We will invite the mainstream press up to cover this farm and pug the open source engineers efforts shortly.

So i think we have a good start here for all. We not only achieved a 40% increase in MPG
We also got the premier of our state on record regarding this technology and others.

Also featured is the most efficient drill in the world (RV). There are many good examples of the open source energy communities research being applied here IN THE REAL WORLD and doing real benefit. There is also valid FACTS showing how we need to create more security and attain more political support (and grant support ) for this technology/FREE ENERGY technology. Plus valid reasoning for the non profit Panacea R and center solution.

There is also a mention of the ZPE aspect of the RV and asks for help for Hector the inventor. BTW two of our engineers (open source ones) were suppressed trying to release the self running designs, ill have more info on that later.

There is a medium here for every one to use to help the cause.More to come all. Please us this info and forward to farmer s and you local politicians if you can.All technologies featured can be found on the no profit open source engineers uni site.
panaceauniversity.org

Ash

The Energy Footprint of Bottled Water

by: Andrea Thompson
Senior Writer
LiveScience.com andrea Thompson
livescience.com – Wed Mar 18, 6:19 pm ET

Our bottled water habit has a huge environmental impact, including the amount of energy it takes to make the plastic bottles, fill them and ship them to thirsty consumers worldwide.

A new study breaks down just how much energy is used at each step of the process.

An estimated total of the equivalent of 32 million to 54 million barrels of oil was required to generate the energy to produce the amount of bottled water consumed in the United States in 2007, according to the study, detailed in the January-March issue of the journal Environmental Research Letters. Of course, this is but a third of a percent of the energy that the United States consumes as a whole in a year.

In 2007, the last year for which global statistics were available, more than 200 billion liters of bottled water were sold around the world, mostly in North America and Europe. The total amount sold in the United States alone that year (33 billion liters) averages out to about 110 liters (almost 30 gallons) of water per person, according to the Beverage Marketing Corporation.

Since 2001, bottled water sales have increased by 70 percent in the United States, far surpassing those of milk and beer. Only sodas have larger sales.

The energy required to produce bottled water is particularly of interest now, at a time when many nations are looking for ways to reduce their energy use and associated climate impacts.

Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute, a nonpartisan research institute, and his colleague Heather Cooley recently realized that no one had done a comprehensive survey of the energy use involved in the complete production cycle of bottled water, so they took on the task.

Plastic and transportation

The energy use breaks down into roughly four parts of the production cycle: that used to make the plastic and turn it into bottles, to treat the water, to fill and cap the bottles, and finally to transport them.

"Energy is used in a lot of different phases," Gleick said.

Most plastic bottles are made of polyethylene terephthalate (PET). Little pellets of PET are melted and fused together to make the bottle mold. Gleick and Cooley estimated that about 1 million tons of PET were used to make plastic bottles in the United States in 2007, with 3 million tons used globally; the energy used to produce that global amount of PET and the bottles it was turned into was equivalent to about 50 billion barrels of oil, they found.

(Some companies have been shifting toward using lighter-weight plastics for their bottles, which reduces the amount of PET produced by about 30 percent and would therefore lower the amount of energy required to make them. The transition to less energy-intensive plastic is slow though, and not all companies use them.)

The amount of energy involved in that first step was a surprise to Gleick: "I didn't know how much energy it takes to make plastic or turn plastic into a bottle," he told LiveScience.

The energy required to treat water is substantially less and depends on how many treatments are used on the water and doesn't account for the bulk of the energy spent in production. Likewise, the energy used to clean, fill, seal and label the bottles is only about 0.34 percent of the energy built into the bottle itself.

The energy used to transport the bottled water depends mainly on how far it is shipped and what transportation method is used. Air cargo is the costliest energy method, followed by truck, cargo ship and rail shipping, in that order. A different study on the carbon footprint of wine also found this breakdown of energy use for transportation methods.

In their study, Gleick and Cooley used the examples of different types of water shipped to Los Angeles: water produced locally and shipped by truck involved the least amount of energy, followed by water sent by cargo ship from Fiji, with water produced in France and shipped by cargo ship and rail having the highest energy costs.

Individual choices

The final tally of 32 million to 54 million barrels of oil may be only about a third of a percent of the total U.S. energy consumption, but it could be considered an "unnecessary use of energy," Gleick said. (Roughly three times as much oil would have been needed to produce the global amount of bottled water consumed.)

The amount is 2,000 times more than is required to make tap water, "and we live in a country where we have very good tap water," Gleick said.

Gleick said that the purpose of the study was not to propose that bottled water be banned, but to help consumers "understand the implications of our choices." With the information on the energy impacts, "we may choose to do different things as individuals," he added.

Understanding the energy costs of the process also sheds light on the greenhouse gases that energy use emits. "Energy is sort of the first piece of the puzzle," Gleick said.

Quiz: What's Your Environmental Footprint?
The Truth About 'Healthy' Bottled Water
Energy News and Information
Original Story: The Energy Footprint of Bottled Water

Assembly of super 7 cell 2 of 3

I thought this is worth a second look, this Super 7 electrode core is composed of 7 outer tubes TIG welded together with a floating inner tubes connected by TIG welded SS rods... is a very basic design. What makes it special is it's arrangement, This honeycomb formation seems to have some electro magnetic effect and the TIG welded state also makes the electrodes possess zero resistance with each other... eliminating the imbalance or voltage drop per cell. To a certain extent - we can consider this as a fully modified 2 electrode design with maximized reactive surface utilization of 7 times 7.

This is one of my early videos which is kept private for a long while... I think it's about time to declassify it.

The unit you saw here is prototype #0001 - it is already in the possession of the Vancouver Gadgeteers Club, used as test or demo unit.

In this video, the inner tubes are placed securely inside with the use of flexible hose inserts, cut to small pieces...

The outer tube is treated with an semi conductive metal treatment oil, this allows my cell to retain all it's reactive energy within the inner side only, the oil serves as a coating to make the outer side sealed off from energy spill, it therefore increases the chimney effect factor occurring naturally inside.

My experience with coating the outer tube is the cell produces more stronger than without.

We have less than 100 months to reduce out Carbon Footprint significantly by half or more than half in order to stop some seriously irreversible effects of Global Warming. I am sharing this Super 7 idea to the world so more people can actually benefit from it. The design is simple, small, compact and cheap to make. It is also very solid.

I am not saying this will save you fuel... I dont care much about that. But I am saying - this is going to help save our planet.

For what good does it bring you if you gain the whole world, save fuel, save money... when you are not going to enjoy it tomorrow when there's no more planet to live healthily in?.

We all breathe one and the same air, walk one and the same earth, drink one and the same water... We are all in the same boat... It's our responsibility.

I am doing my part for quite some time already... I keep track of the waste I produce everyday... If I can help it, I wont produce waste. If I can help it - I won't drive a car, nor even travel... If I can help it. But of course, we cannot stop driving... the only Quick Fix I can think of that brings a permanent or long term benefit is Hydrogen on demand Combustion enhancement system for your cars. It doesn't cost much, a small price to pay for a huge reward for humanity. You lose nothing by adopting this technology into your daily routine. You are not only cutting your Greenhouse emissions by Half or more than Half!... the more you drive... the more you are actually Generating O2's which will help rebuild or patch up the Ozone Layer hole. This is a win win win situation. You are hitting 3 birds in one stone!

The 3 birds:
1. Reduction of Toxic Greenhouse Gas/ Humanities Health
2. Increase Mileage/ Increase Engine Life/ Increase Performance/ Savings for your pocket.
3. Increase O2 Output significantly to Strengthen Ozone Layer

It's about time you experience Guilt-Free Living and Guilt-Free Driving.

But what if the world ends tomorrow in spite of all these efforts... I can only say, it better to die trying than dying in vain.

Life is about the struggle we put in every fight. The fight is about saving our boat... the boat is sinking and we all have to get our acts together - collectively.

Forget about New World Orders and conspiracies... this is about You and the rest of humanity alike.

If you don't do it now... the question will is Who will?

POPULAR MECHANICS on Water Powered Cars

This is the article that was able to discredit most HHO scammers and legitimate HHO Experimenters alike. I have read this the moment it was published but wasnt really bothered about it. If you will read it thoroughly to the last paragraph, the editor actually is convinced that there is indeed some science here.... Diesel engines getting 10 to 12% consistent results, he is still getting data, so we just have to stay tuned, this is my opinion but I will leave the rest to your judgement, please read on...



Water-Powered Cars: Hydrogen Electrolyzer Mod Can't Up MPGs

After batting down the hype over startups and DIYers claiming they could run a car on water, PM's senior automotive editor installs a hand-built HHO kit—only to find he was right the first time. Can bad chemistry keep the myth of the water car alive? More heavy testing in the PM garage will tell.

By Mike Allen
Published on: August 7, 2008

Water-powered cars continue to be the largest single topic taking over my in box—and the Comments section of this Web site. And it's not just my recent column on the truth about water-chugging prototypes. This trend has become an obsession with many backyard inventors, and some of them have become quite strident, insisting that if I knew anything at all about cars, I'd be embracing this technology. They say it could help change the world as we know it. They even say it could eliminate the energy crisis altogether. For this sentiment, I applaud them. And honestly, I hope it's all true.

Unfortunately, I have to indict their physics. The entire concept of running your car on water is based on bad science. The idea is to use electricity from the car's alternator to electrolyze water into HHO, a mixture of pure hydrogen and oxygen. This mix is fed into the intake air, where it is burned along with gasoline, thereby increasing your fuel economy anywhere from 15 to 100 percent—depending on which Web site you're visiting. Believe the hype, and those 1 to 2 liters of HHO streamed into the engine will double the fuel economy, clean the engine out, and maybe even grow hair. Plenty of these budget sites even claim their devices are efficient enough for a version that would run a car entirely on water—no gasoline at all.

If this sounds like it's too good to be true, it is. And I've discussed it in this column too many times to go over again, so I won't. I've tested way too many bogus gas savers and miracle fuel-saving gadgets over the years to buy in to this one. So it's time to put up or shut up, and do what we do best around here—test drive, generate real-world numbers, and come up with realistic answers.

So, last month I received an electrolyzer, fabricated by my old Monster Garage partner, Steve Rumore at Avalanche Engineering out in Colorado. Steve cleverly designed the device into a steel toolbox, making it portable—just the ticket for someone tinkering with HHO/water/hydrogen/Brown's Gas­powered conveyances. Steve isn't a gadget geek—his company fabricates championship off-road vehicles. But he was talked into making a couple of HHO units by one of his customers. And why not? The plans are all over the Internet, and the tech isn't very complicated. The unit consists of eight plastic bottles with stainless-steel electrodes, connected up in series—parallel to the vehicle's battery. The cells are filled with plain ol' water and a small amount of potassium hydroxide electrolyte to conduct electricity. A hose conveys the HHO output to the engine.

It took me a few days of puttering around in my shop to get the electrolyzer up and running. I'm using an HKS Camp 2 onboard computer, hooked into an LCD monitor that's suction-cupped to the windscreen, to check things like mass airflow, fuel-injector pulse width, battery voltage and, of course, fuel economy. The Camp 2 took a little debugging, but now I've got the whole science-fiction mess installed in one of our long-term test cars, complete with wires and hoses everywhere and a back-flash trap/flow meter bubbling away on the dash like Dr. Frankenstein's hookah. This fiendish device prevents any backfire-related explosion in the HHO line from propagating back into the electrolyzer. It also provides instant visual feedback of HHO delivery to the intake, as bubbles scurry from the bottom to the top of the water column. Yes, I have it mounted inside the car.

But guess what? My fuel economy is exactly the same, whether the HHO generator is turned on or not. And that's exactly what I expected. This isn't anecdotal evidence from several tankfuls of gasoline. It's steady-state, flat-road testing, and I don't even pretend to have actual economy numbers. I'm using fuel-injector pulse widths directly from the OBD II port. That means I'm measuring the actual time the injectors are open and delivering fuel. When the HHO generator is toggled on, there's no change. And when it's turned back off, there's no change. Well, the computer's system voltage sags a couple of tenths of a volt, indicating the current drain to run the electrolyzer.

Before you HHO proponents start bombarding me with hate mail, chill. You may have some amazing anecdotal evidence that these systems work. But I'm not swayed by over-the-road proof unless the conditions are constant—the variables are too, well, variable. And that includes my own testing. There's too much noise in the data collection, statistically speaking, and quite a bit of room for experimenter bias. From considerable experience with other gas savers, I know even the subtlest change in driving habits can influence the results. I won't be convinced of any fuel savings until I see results on a dynamometer, where I can control everything except the HHO.

I spent a good hour on the phone yesterday with Fran Giroux of hydrogen-boost.com. He tells me that the HHO injection is only an enabler for other devices and changes. The fuel savings doesn't come from the energy contained in the hydrogen as it's burned, which is what I've asserted all along was implausible. Giroux sells a system of modifications that disables the engine management's computer and makes the engine run extremely lean—as lean as 20:1. That's far from the normal 14.7:1. The hydrogen is necessary to let the ultralean mix burn completely, he claims. There's also a heater for the fuel to promote complete vaporization, and some additives for the fuel and oil to complete his system.

Interesting? Why, yes. But there's a catch.

These mods come under the category of tampering with a federally-mandated emissions control system, making it impossible to pass the underhood visual inspection component of many state smog inspections. To pass this underhood check, no part of the emissions control system can appear to have been modified or disabled. Add in the OBD II pass-fail to the smog check, and odds are these modifications will keep you from getting a smog sticker. That means you might have to disable—and perhaps remove—the system to pass the annual test. Just don't get caught in between.

I had another long talk yesterday with Steve Rumore, my off-road buddy turned HHO donater. He's experimenting with several vehicles, and actually getting some consistent results—fuel-economy improvements to the tune of 10 to 12 percent on diesel trucks pulling trailers. He's tinkering with some of the same things Giroux is suggesting. We're looking into ways to refine both his and my experimental methods. But I'm convinced there's a lot of placebo effect. I also think that these mods may be increasing fuel economy independently of the HHO injection. So stay tuned, because we're still testing. Once we get some more data onboard, we'll be dyno testing.

What a beautiful world...

Save The Planet - video powered by Metacafe

What inspires me to pursue this science... For what does a man gain if he profits and gains the whole world if he is not going to enjoy it tomorrow or the day after?

We all breathe the same air, we all walk the same earth, we all drink the same water... Saving the planet is every human beings responsibility.

We need to get our acts together and stop playing the smart Aleck.

Everybody wants to be a hero... well, here's your chance to be one.

My way of saving the planet is by driving as often as I can... why? Because the cars I am using produces more O2 than it burns... it also produces 85% less CO and 50% less HC. But the fact remains that it becomes an Ozone Generator - just like a tree.

I see this as a quick fix - an immediate solution with a long term benefit. It is so good it is a win, win, win situation. It is so good that the enemies of the earth tries hard with all their might to suppress it.

One of my videos in youtube was actually stolen... this is the Mileage Test 1 of the Purple Bug. Another video was taken out of the search engines of Google... "The HHO Purple Bug Success" in AOL Uncut Video. For what reason, I don't know. I see nothing wrong with those videos... they are merely proofs of concept video documents showing my hydrogen on demand system worked on my scooter and the VW bug.

We cannot stop driving or consuming energy... but we can stop polluting the atmosphere and start reinforcing the earths only protection against the Suns' UV rays... the O zone.

I am not showing you how to make your own HHO or hydrogen assist system here, there are plenty of guys who are already doing it for you. I am merely showing how you can actually use it to get immediate benefit. It is the installation part that's giving all the headaches.

According to Prince Charles... we have only 100 months to save the planet. I agree with him... and my question has always been the same...

"If you don't do it NOW... the question is, Who will?..."

I guess, I just declared my advocacy.

If a person wanted to do something right... why stop him? Let him do it. ... this is according to an old Chinese adage.

Wake up!... there's still time enough.

Prince Charles plea for humanity to save the planet

We only have 100 months left to do it... If you dont do it now... the question is... WHO will???

A SOLUTION to Prince Charles' Speech

A 50cc scooter, "turbocharged" with the Gadgeteers' onboard hydrogen fuel cell, produces approximately 25% more power and visibly less smoke, according to this CTV news report. With such a small motor, the carbon "footprint" is correspondingly much less, in fact, tiny, tiny, tiny, compared to a typical 6000cc 8-cylinder vehicle.

Please check out the Gadgeteers' other video clips on this Hydrogen Hybrid Kymco scooter.

Like the news reporter says, the cost of this onboard fuel cell is only $200 -- a very small price to save this planet, isn't it?

Of course, an electric scooter is also a good, if not better solution, albeit the speed of an electric scooter is restricted to 32KPH in some jurisdictions.

Thanks, Prince Charles, for your "100 months left to save this planet" speech to 200 business leaders

The Hydrogen Hybrid scooter is Gadgeteer Rob's last gadgeteering project.

How Two-stroke Engines Work

To better understand how Hydroxy gas can benefit a 2 stroke engine... it is best to see in 3D how a stroke engine works.

Enjoy and Learn form the video above... from Howstuffworks.com