H2O > HHO gas. Why do we still need petrol?? by Calhoun

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

There's all kinds of efficient alternates to petrol. Like Firefly, however, they just don't get the marketing they deserve.

Plus, buying new things or altering what you have can be expensive. This is another road block, I think. Sudden change is rare and difficult and gradual change when it comes to something like this is... inefficient. I guess that would be the best way to put it. It just doesn't take off the way it should.

***********

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 12:01 AM

If this is to be believed (100 miles on 4 ounces of water) the only exhaust byproduct being water vapour, then this must be heralded as a momentous breakthru and turning point in civilization!! The end of a need for fossil fuels! The end of the 100 rich ass Arabs strangle hold on the worlds economy! We can finally start to reverse global warming..

If this is for real then IT IS HUGE!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 12:04 AM

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Right, huge. So was the Veggie Van and the recycling center that can turn garbage into high-quality oil. And fuel cells and wind power and any number of breakthroughs that aren't "cost-effective" because they (gasp!) cost money initially.
I'm sorry, I'm being cynical, aren't I?

***********

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 1:26 AM

No.. Really..

This is basically free energy we are talking about here! Do you really see the significance? It cant be real..

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 1:37 AM

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Yes, I really see the significance. Most of what I listed above was basically "free energy" too, with the exception of fuel cells. Turning waste into energy is actually, IMO, better than just free energy. But it still costs money to alter engines and the like so it works, so that's not free. And the recycling center mentioned also costs money to get up and running, so it's not free. And if this is real, it would also cost money to alter things, and it isn't free either.
I'm telling you: Marketing. Just not getting it. Not getting the funding it needs. Not getting government sancions (well, in the UK it tends to more)
Here in Colorado there is a man living in the high, cold, Rockies who built a self-sustaining jungle environment in his house. His heating bill is $5 a month. How many people do you think are following his example?
Same state, the Veggie Van; guy altered his van so it could run on veggie oil. He goes to resaurants and cleans out their fryers and has FREE FUEL from waste. Plus, from what he says, it makes his car smell like french fries all the time. Again, how many other people are doing this? No one, because it all costs money. I can't afford to do it on my own; without government funding, very few people can.
Yes, I definitely see the significance.

***********

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 1:50 AM

CRUITHNE3753

Well this is basically hydrogen fuel, except this idiot keeps it mixed with oxygen (HHO gas), which is unstable and can't be stored for any real length of time, and would be highly explosive under pressure. It also still takes electrical energy to produce it. Hydrogen by itself would be safer, since after all there's plenty of oxygen in the air to burn with, but still has storage problems as it is extremely bulky even when liquified - look at the Shuttle tank!

It's still not free energy though either, as you need electricity to electrolyse the water.

And if that flame was truly "hotter than the surface of the Sun" as they say in the clip, it would be so blindingly bright you'd need a welder's mask to be able to look at it without melting your eyeballs, or indeed your face at that distance...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 1:51 AM

Burning oils and most gasses even veggie oil still has the down side of producing harmful emissions whereas fracturing water to produce and combust hydrogen only produces water as an emission.

I think the real stumbling blocks here are the governments and BIG businesses of the world who make fortunes from the fossil fuel infrastructure. If fossil fuels were suddenly to become obsolete then world economies would suffer immensly. It seems to me that the Arabs controlling most of the oil in the world would stop at pretty much nothing to make these sorts of technologies "go away" and considering the amounts of money governments would stand to lose I dont think they would really like to see the end of fossil fuels either.. Thats why I dont think we will really see these technologies emerge until every last drop of oil is gone..

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 1:53 AM

I await the scientific types of browncoats responses.. Citizen?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 2:04 AM

Stanley Meyer http://www.waterfuelcell.org/ I believe is the founder of this technology. Hydrogen on demand, no need for storage tanks and he purports to fracturing water with his patented method of electrolosis using much less electricity (milliamps as oppposed to the amps normally required). This is what makes it unique compared to conventional electrolosis which takes more energy in the form of electricity than is released in the form of hydrogen. These guys reckon and seem to have proven to be able to make more energy in the form of hydrogen than used making it(electricity).

This in my eyes makes it free energy..

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 2:04 AM

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Yes, that's what I mean by marketing. big busines and governments are in charge of marketing.
And fuel cells use hydrogen fusion to produce energy; the only emission is water. Hot water, as a matter of fact, so those who actually use them to power their houses also have a steady stream of heated water. They are, however, hellaciously expensive.
Scientific? Ok, so Citizen is, but what am I? Chopped liver? *points to self* Regular Discover reader at the very least. I do get my facts from somewhere, you know.

***********

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 2:11 AM

This should be in the RWED, I only say because sometimes people can get upset if an RWED thread makes the rest of the site 'unclean'.

Before I totally believe it I want it replicated in an independent lab. The welder's simple enough, but I wouldn't be surprised if obtaining the HHO gas from the Water doesn't take more energy than is obtained from the gas it self.

Couldn't find much information on the gas but Wikipedia has this:

Quote:
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HHO_gas
The most popular theory presented to explain these properties is that Brown's gas contains monatomic hydrogen and oxygen in significant proportions. This would explain the higher volume (the volume of a gas is proportional to the number of particles), but not some of the other claims. In particular, monatomic hydrogen and oxygen would burn with a hotter flame because the monatomic form has more energy than the normal diatomic form and this extra energy would be released as heat.
...
Skeptics point out that there is no solid evidence for any of these unusual properties, and suggest that all the observations could be explained by normal electrolysis and ordinary diatomic hydrogen and oxygen. Proponents seem reluctant to perform direct comparisons of Brown's gas with hydrogen/oxygen mixtures produced by more conventional means.

Claims that Brown's gas could be used as fuel for cars and other everyday energy needs are also met with skepticism, because it has not been demonstrated that it can be compressed to fit into a reasonable space without becoming dangerously explosive. Even proponents of some forms of the gas acknowledge that it is chronically unstable-rapidly degrading into basic H2 and O2 gas. It is thus unsuitable for storage, and can only be produced on demand. This makes the gas impractical for automotive use, as stored electricity used for on-demand electrolysis would be more efficiently spent on a purely electrical propulsion system. Even if storage problems are overcome, the gas's capacity to store energy is limited by the first law of thermodynamics, and thus offers no unique energy storage characteristics when compared to "normal" hydrogen. Conventional electrolysis of water into hydrogen already achieves theoretical energy efficiency of up to 94%, and no study on Brown's gas has properly researched the efficiency of the production process.

This makes the gas impractical for automotive use, as stored electricity used for on-demand electrolysis would be more efficiently spent on a purely electrical propulsion system.
This is something I suspected, I imagine that if the HHO gas system is really built into the prototype it needs the petrol system to generate its fuel through electrolysis. It takes a lot of energy to split water.

There’s also a discussion on it here:
http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=20763

Finally we’ll still need Oil. Oil has many, many uses, material uses such as plastics and commercial synthetic fertilisers are made using Oil.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
"I had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalog: 'No good in a bed, but fine against a wall'." -- Eleanor Roosevelt.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 2:12 AM

LOL! No offense intended Phoenixrose..

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 2:19 AM

Aha! I thought you would chime in eventually Citizen

What are your thoughts about Stanley Meyers claims of way better than 100% efficiency with his patented process of electrolosis? Hoax?

I am a skeptic myself but i believe even if these claims were real we would never ever really know about it until all the worlds oil reserves are depleted.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 2:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Calhoun:
What are your thoughts about Stanley Meyers claims of way better than 100% efficiency with his patented process of electrolosis? Hoax?

Greater than 100% efficiency breaks the laws of thermodynamics, so until conclusively proved otherwise I'd say hoax.

From the site:

Quote:
The water fuel cell uses a different process from electrolysis. In the fuel cell electrons are restricted, the water molecule undergoes a lot more stress, and an added sequence of events produce a much higher energy efficiency than electrolysis.

Electrons restricted? Electrolysis works because it breaks the covalent bonds between atoms. That takes energy and no matter how you do it, it always takes the same amount of energy.

So if this system can put in less electricity but get the same volume of gas out, where the hell is the rest of the energy coming from?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 4:38 AM

PDCHARLES

What happened? He see your face?

Yeah, like hydrogen cells, there is no resource friendly way of producing it in large quantities.

Putting these out there for info...(i know some of us are studied up on dis) I am currently trying to push the FlexFuel issue in my city... Only one city in my state offers FlexFuel currently.

http://www.ethanol.org/
http://www.ethanol.org/e85.html

Sure, reducing emissions form cars to 0% at this stage is a tough challenge. But it IS possible to make an impact.

PR, it does take money... so when afforded the opportunity, lobby your local officials and politicians. Letters, town council meetings, etc.

Wind energy is actually growing...
http://www.awea.org/default.htm
http://www.awea.org/projects/index.html
http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WindPowerTodayFinal.pdf

There are ways to produce power and send it back to the grid.
http://www.off-grid.net/index.php

http://www.off-grid.net/index.php?p=583#more-583

IF we (the US, one of the only countries not growing commercial hemp), used comm. hemp, corn, and vegetable waste product for all if its luscious cellulose, we could greatly reduce our need for a lot of petroleum products and produce perfectly good, strong, plastics and fibers from it. Might hurt DuPont's (and others) profits though.

An area I haven't seen much progress in is the dirty coal industry where we get most our grid power.

We can and have to get involved... Sorry, hit a sensitive topic.

Oh, I am interested to know if this option is offered in any of you browncoat's areas: (prolly too expensive of a venture for trash co.s and cities)
So, I recycle what I can. I was thinking that no matter the weight or volume of trash I do throw away, I pay the trash service the same every two months. If they charged by weight or volume, like at most landfills, there would be incentive to conserve more and throw away less. But measuring this volume/weight per customer, per truck is costly for equipment and infrastructure I guess.

GO CANES!!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 4:46 AM

You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.

Yeah, wind power is slowly growing. Use it myself (my family was one of the first to sign on in this state) but the thing is... it costs more than regular power. Oh yes, yes it does. Not a lot, but still. The good thing is that Colorado is just flooded with wind. But it's still a very small percentage of people who are using it.
And recycling is actually almost mandatory in my city.

***********

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:02 AM

PDCHARLES

What happened? He see your face?

That is awesome your parents were one of the first peeps on board.

Hopefully, with the implementation of new areas, that cost will go down. New Huge Mega Watt producing machines are going up all the time.

http://www.awea.org/news/First_Quarter_Market_Report_Energy_On_Track_0
50306.html

As far as recycling goes... it is not mandatory where I am from unfortunately. But, I was talking about the waste that is not recycled. Could cost for refuse be measured by volume or measured on a household-to-household basis? (or is it somewhere?, not landfills) EDIT: As in: curb side pickup.

GO CANES!!!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:10 AM

CHRISISALL

You all seriously need to watch 'Chain Reaction'. It details 'the powers that be's' feeling on the matter (plus, it's a cool flick!).

I put the H in the H2O Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:17 AM

As has been said, at best this is a case of not sharing enough info. This is not a case of "unlimited energy". That is impossible. All it is is another form of energy storage (put energy in, take it out later). In order to be at all viable, you would need to pair it with a different form of energy, most likely nuclear. Also, as has been said, this looks pretty unstable to me, I would rather keep my H and my O away from each other while in storage, but hey, I am just an old fashioned dude who doesn't like being in the center of a fireball, what do I know.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 5:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
Yes, that's what I mean by marketing. big busines and governments are in charge of marketing.
And fuel cells use hydrogen fusion to produce energy; the only emission is water. Hot water, as a matter of fact, so those who actually use them to power their houses also have a steady stream of heated water. They are, however, hellaciously expensive.
Scientific? Ok, so Citizen is, but what am I? Chopped liver? *points to self* Regular Discover reader at the very least. I do get my facts from somewhere, you know.

***********

Just so we are clear, fuel cells do not use hydrogen fusion. They merely burn hydrogen gas in the pressence of oxygen. If it was fusion, there would be a few problems... (such as the reaction needed to take place in an area with heat equalling about that of a nuclear explosion)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 6:54 AM

Quote:
In order to be at all viable, you would need to pair it with a different form of energy, most likely nuclear. Also, as has been said, this looks pretty unstable to me, I would rather keep my H and my O away from each other while in storage, but hey, I am just an old fashioned dude who doesn't like being in the center of a fireball, what do I know.

Erm I doubt nuclear would be the way to go. For power generation you'd be better off just using Nuclear on it's own, for cars you'd find it a little difficult to get a car with a Fission reactor in the boot on the market.

H and O? Thats water you know...

The storage is actually in the form of H2O, a compound of Hydrogen and Oxygen which is actually quite a stable...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 8:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
In order to be at all viable, you would need to pair it with a different form of energy, most likely nuclear. Also, as has been said, this looks pretty unstable to me, I would rather keep my H and my O away from each other while in storage, but hey, I am just an old fashioned dude who doesn't like being in the center of a fireball, what do I know.

Erm I doubt nuclear would be the way to go. For power generation you'd be better off just using Nuclear on it's own, for cars you'd find it a little difficult to get a car with a Fission reactor in the boot on the market.

H and O? Thats water you know...

The storage is actually in the form of H2O, a compound of Hydrogen and Oxygen which is actually quite a stable...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
"I had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalog: 'No good in a bed, but fine against a wall'." -- Eleanor Roosevelt.

umm, what? Yeah, I said paired with, as in TO GET THE ENERGY. Not like, have a nuclear reactor in your car. You have a nuclear generator, which makes electricity, which you use for electropheresis, which gives you the fuel you use, which you put in your car. H and O is NOT water. H is hydrogen, as H2 gas at STP, O is Oxygen, as O2 gas at STP, keeping them away from each other minimises the risk. H2O is NOT the storage form, that is water, which would be product of the reaction.

So, electricity from nuclear power turns water into H2 and O2, which is burned, which releases energy and forms H2O again.

So, in conclusion, I have no idea what you were trying to say with that post.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 12:14 PM

SASSALICIOUS

100% efficiency is impossible because something is always lost as heat due to friction.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 12:34 PM

I don't quite understand why you got out of your pram at me but obviosly its a pile on Citizen day.

Anyway:

Quote:
Originally posted by Gilthanass:
umm, what? Yeah, I said paired with, as in TO GET THE ENERGY. Not like, have a nuclear reactor in your car. You have a nuclear generator, which makes electricity, which you use for electropheresis, which gives you the fuel you use, which you put in your car.

The idea was that you could put water in your car and use this method to power the car. Ergo if you were to link this with nuclear fission you have to have a reactor in your car.

If you misunderstood the concept that's none of my concern.

Quote:
H and O is NOT water.

Yes I know that, you were acting like you can't get a stable compound from Hydrogen and Oxygen, which blatantly you can, it's called water.

Quote:
H is hydrogen, as H2 gas at STP, O is Oxygen, as O2 gas at STP, keeping them away from each other minimises the risk.

Since the tech we're talking about stores water your original statement makes no sense.

Your misunderstanding of the topic is not my fault.

Quote:
H2O is NOT the storage form, that is water, which would be product of the reaction.

Water is the storage form, that's the point.

Water is electrolysised to produce the gas that is combusted. Water is stored in the tank.

Please don't attack me for your misunderstanding.

Quote:
So, in conclusion, I have no idea what you were trying to say with that post.

Well if you read my post and the source material of the thread you would.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 12:48 PM

Honeslty, I think you might be the one who doesn't understand what this guy is trying to do. It would make no sense to take water, and a battery (power source) along too for electropheresis because, frankly, at that point you should just use the power source to power your car. What I got was that this dude used electricity on the water FIRST, then produced a liquid that was basically H and O together, but NOT water (because it had could release energy by burning and becoming water). It was misleading, but he did not just put water in his tank, he put his new "fuel" MADE from water (by an input of energy).

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 1:10 PM

The "guy" is claiming to produce HHO(gas, not liquid). Its not clear if he is storing it or producing "on-demand"

Stanley Meyer definitely claims to be producing "on-demand" using a high frequency pulsed low amp current. One of the videos claims 1700% efficency.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 1:19 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Calhoun:
One of the videos claims 1700% efficency.

If he is really claiming that, then it is just a hoax. If anyone could get 1700% efficency out of anything, they would have succeeded in cracking the laws of thermodynamics. The implications of anything above 100% would be ridiculous.

So, if that is indeed what he is claiming, I appologise to citizen. I was going under the assumption that this person was keeping himself confined to the laws of science, I guess I was wrong.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 3:50 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Good video. I hope this guy don't wind up dead, like the other inventor of a water-powered car.

I'd heard about it on the shortwave from www.ThePowerHour.com last month. Thanks for digging it up. I'm definitely in the market for this water welder, since its so much easier to get fuel than my oxyacetaline torch. It's sort of like an electric TIG welder that makes its own gas, but uses less energy since the ultra high frequency (50,000 Hz not 60 Hz) taps into the free magnetosphere, like free solar power, but from electromagnetism not photons. It's also so much safer to breathe the air, since its just water vapor, and ordinary welder fumes are deadly poisons. Too bad they're greedy and selling it for 10 times more than an ordinary welder.

Here's the company that's in that news video:

Quote:

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Hydrogen Technology Applications
Our technology centers on the ability to generate a unique type of hydrogen/oxygen gas mixture (a "unique gas", which we call "Aquygen™" gas) on demand from a lightweight, compact machine that uses the water electrolysis process as its underlying technology basis. This unique gas is infinitely stable until it comes in contact with a select target media. Then it sublimates, causing a molecular surface exchange of certain elements, reacting with such excitation as to cause temperatures of up to 10,000° F, the temperature of our Sun's surface, which is currently the limits of our ability to measure. The ability to create this stable, unique gas on demand from a water electrochemical generator is of great strategic importance, especially because (1) it offers a workable energy level per pound of fuel that is ten-to-twelve times that of gasoline; (2) when combusted/ignited, it causes no hydrocarbon effluents such as NOX, nitrites, nitrates, etc., and (3) its by-product from combustion is pure, environmentally-friendly water. Purchase: The H2O 1500 Aquygen™ Gas Generator can be purchased for $6995. Lease Term Monthly Lease Payment: 60 months $175.
http://hytechapps.com

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: It Runs on Water
"Free energy" steam engines and cosmic ray antennas to run electric motors. Modern electralysis of water with low amps at high volts and 50,000 hertz produces hydrogen and oxygen on demand from fuel cell at 1,700% normal efficiency. In 1995 gasoline price in USA was under $1/gallon. Cars that run on water. Special appearance by Nikola Tesla. By British Equinox
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2464139837181538044

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Water Car inventor murdered
Stanley Meyer, who got many death threats, had died of some kind of mysterious food poisoning. Cold fusion water expert Dr Gene Mallove, author of Fire from Ice: Searching for the Truth behind the Cold Fusion Furor, and editor of Infinite Energy Magazine, was also murdered in a home invasion
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3333992194168790800&q=water+c
ar+inventor+murdered

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Water Powered Cars
Same waterwelder video by Fox26 News
http://www.rratch.com/Misc/WaterFuel/WaterFuel.wmv

Water powered rocket man

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Water Rocketman Lost in Space
The Rocketbelt ® is the most original, spectacular vehicle available for super crowd-pleasing entertainment and product endorsement. There is simply nothing like it in the world!!! Blown away were the 35,000 screaming spectators as the Rocketman swept past, landed and unveiled their nations flag before the presidential box. "Sean "P. Diddy" Combs – or could it be a stunt double? – blasts into a Miami press conference on Monday to announce the 2005 MTV Video Music Awards nominees." The Rocketman is featured on Letterman's popular popular "Top 10" list on May 17, 2004. Letterman's audience was blown away with the reenactment of a historical flight at Flushing Meadows more than 40 years ago at the 1964 Worlds Fair. By Rocketman.org
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3203587941333797889&q=rocket

Danger Will Robinson Danger!!!
http://alphacenturi.tripod.com/lis.html

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Water Rocketman.org
The Rocketbelt was originally created by Bell Aerospace for the military in the 1950's. Actual lift is provided by two rocket nozzles, which are fed by a central generator, controlled by a throttle at the pilots right-hand. The left-hand control operates jetavators for yaw control and the delicate combination of these two controls permits complete freedom of flight. The Rocketbelt is highly maneuverable, consistent and loud. Max range 800 feet, max altitude 150 feet, max speed is 35mph, max flight is 30 seconds. 800hp, 150 pounds weight including Hydrogen Peroxide fuel. Rent yours today!
http://www.rocketman.org/videogallery.html

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Water Bottle Rocket World Altitude Record
BIG bangs for your bucks. Experience the agony and the ecstasy of sending a rocket past all known limits, higher than anyone ever thought a toy water rocket could go! Faster in the 1/4 mile than a 7,000hp 300mph Top Fuel dragster. Movie sound track music features the Harmonoids' unique style of orchestral rock-pop. 1,000 psi watter bottles explode like Space Shuttle Challenger. By AntigravityResearch.com
http://antigravityresearch.com/all_of_antigravity_s_bizarre_water_rock
et_movies___a_real_must_see_.htm

Homebrew physics - Metal nail antenna makes plasma Ball Lightning in your microwave oven
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/oa_plsm3.htm
http://piratenews.org/video-archive.html

Fun with physics - DIY glow in the dark 30kv plasma antigravity tinfoil Lifter UFO
Electrojet engines have no moving parts
http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/main.htm

http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/logbook/italifter/index.htm
http://plasma.ee.utk.edu

Did the Jewish Rockefeller Gang become multitrillionaires, living in the White House, by waiting for talking heads on TeeVee to tell them the truth? Rockefeller Plaza is the name of the building in NY City where ALL the TV networks are located. But their Media Mafia is not allowed to report on their annual secret society meetings at Bilderberger Group, Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations (founder of United Nations Corporation) and Bohemian Club at Bohemian Grove. Last year, Bilderburger Sir Heinz "Henry" Kissinger Jewish Knight of the British Empire confessed Bilderberger Group wants $150/barrel oil prices. 80% of Alaskan oil is given away to foreign governments like British Petroleum (BP) and Royal Dutch Shell (Shell) who sell it to Japan, Commie China and Mexico, and most of the rest is pumped back into the ground to drive up oil prices. In 2000, gasoline was 5-cents a gallon in Iraq and $1/gallon in USA. Now Iraq's oil pipeline goes to Rockefeller's Israel, who sells the oil to Communist China...
http://bilderberg.org/2005.htm
http://infowars.com/articles/nwo/secretb.htm

"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
-David Rockefeller, 12-trillionaire Jewish owner of Standard Oil Company, founder of World trade Center, brother of VP Nelson Rockefeller, uncle of President Bill Clinton-Blythe III, autobiography "Memoirs", now meeting with the top 150 world dictators in Ottowah Canada at Bilderberger Super Secret Society on 6/6/6
www.amazon.com

FIREFLY SERENITY PILOT MUSIC VIDEO V2
Tangerine Dream - Thief Soundtrack: Confrontation
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/8912.php

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 4:31 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Here's Mr. Klein's company's website, which explains his process somewhat more clearly.

http://hytechapps.com/

Seems he's generating his combutstable gas ,as needed, by a more efficient form of electrolysis.

Haven't done enough research to say more.

"If Darwin ain't Happy,
Ain't Nobody Happy"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 6:39 PM

TIGER

This claim is utter bullshit. Over the past couple of years I've read reports of a half a dozen different people from around the world "inventing" processes similar to this, most looking for money to continue the work.

If it were really possible to run a car 100 miles on 4oz of water, no amount of corporate or government interference could keep it quiet. It would be sweeping the world like wildfire.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 11, 2006 10:37 PM