Water is tomorrows fuel!

[RodneyBur]

bahhhh.... found this on wikipedia.

The vehicle unveiled by Japanese company Genepax in June 2008. While many news reported dubbed the vehicle a "water-fuel car",[3] it is actually powered by hydrogen generated on-board from the reaction of a metal hydride with water. Since the metal hydride is the ultimate source of the car's energy, it is not truly a water-fuelled car.[4][5]

Water-fuelled car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More info here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genepax

[NorCalCoug]

And of course the energy required to make the metal hydride is actually more than the energy it puts out...

So while it could technically save the consumer money, it would NOT be energy efficient in the long run- in the end, more energy is being spent.

[RodneyBur]

Originally Posted by NorCalCoug

And of course the energy required to make the metal hydride is actually more than the energy it puts out...

So while it could technically save the consumer money, it would NOT be energy efficient in the long run- in the end, more energy is being spent.

In the end using more energy might not be a bad thing. It really depends on where the energy comes from. I don't know squat about metal hydride, but think as long as the energy is renewable and in great supply then it would be okay to waste a little. Is efficiency really important if the energy is renewable and abundant?

[NorCalCoug]

Originally Posted by RodneyBur

In the end using more energy might not be a bad thing. It really depends on where the energy comes from. I don't know squat about metal hydride, but think as long as the energy is renewable and in great supply then it would be okay to waste a little. Is efficiency really important if the energy is renewable and abundant?

Metal hydrides come from reactions, like mixing aluminum and lye together (which violently reacts with hydrogen as it frees the hydrogen from the water)

Of course creating stable metal hydrides requires a refining process that uses energy from the power grid... which burns stuff like coal, fuel oil, or whatever the power grid happens to use, and creates toxic byproducts. So, if we remove a car that puts say 10 tons of pollutants in the air, and replace it with one of these cars which produces only water as a byproduct, but the fuel (metal hydrides) that these cars use put 20 tons of pollutants into the air per car per year, then we haven't done anything but changed where the pollution happens, which is at the point of generation, rather than the back tailpipe of the car.

In essence, what it seems these guys have done is create a car with a hydrogen fuel cell that is "refilled" using water.

[ND4SPD]

well... I was going to post this: Water Powered Cars Will Never Work | EcoGeek
but it seems like this topic is all wrapped up already.

[StealthyWeasel]

Not bad.

It's not efficent but is an alternate source. No nobel prize here; in fact what they did is pretty simple scientifically.

[skater]

We get these threads on the Impala forum so often that they now lock them immediately. Do the research. Read the Wikipedia articles that have been posted (and related articles). Basically there's no way you'll get enough energy out to offset the energy going in, which is what NorCal already said.

[FastCougar]

Step back ... the arguments against all point to polluting energy production on the grid ... what if the grid was entirely powered by "green" means? Example: The entire energy grid is powered by a combination of solar, hydro and wind power ... all 3 completely pollution free ways of generating power. Now you have a great case for H2O as a fuel in a hydride reactor as the hydride production used more energy, but the energy is non polluting. Win/Win ... doesn't matter that it's not "free energy".