rip off sainsbugs!

[Mr. Bish]

It claims that 99% of vehicles can safely run on this. http://www.drivewithwaterfuel.com/?hop=muscleblog

 

Makes me wonder why there is no government funding into this research...... Thats because they truly care more for the money than the enviroment. I guess if they take out fule duty, they will need to find it somewhere else but personally I'd prefer it that way.

[Amelanchier]

It claims that 99% of vehicles can safely run on this. http://www.drivewithwaterfuel.com/?hop=muscleblog

 

Makes me wonder why there is no government funding into this research......

 

Prolly 'cos its a bunch of arse.

[Dagmar]

Prolly 'cos its a bunch of arse.

 

The principal of using H2O or HHO to provide an enhancement to petrol or diesel powered engines has been around for years and as a story its a bit old hat.

 

Just think back to chemistry lessons about 'Browns gas' for example!

 

Check out the two wikipedia articles here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_fuel_enhancement

 

And here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxyhydrogen_flame

 

Browns gas is used in flame cutting so the knowledge to make it well known, but whether you can power a vehicle with it seems a bit vague and inconclusive. If it really worked and lived up to its promises then the research to put it into automotive and engine technology would be underway, thinking back I seem to remember that producing it used a significant ammount of electrical power - more than the power the gas would produce. This suggests that it is not viable commercialy except for some specialist applications. Some even disagree with this however;

 

http://www.alternative-energy-resources.net/browns-gas-the-reality.html

 

Maybe it has a place in the future, but for now it looks like its just another way for the gullible to spend their money

[igottacabstar]

If it really worked and lived up to its promises then the research to put it into automotive and engine technology would be underwayway

 

Do you reckon? Imagine the revenue the government would lose from tax on fossil fuels.

[Dagmar]

Do you reckon? Imagine the revenue the government would lose from tax on fossil fuels.

 

 

Ha Ha! Do you think that they won't tax any replacements? A cash cow is a cash cow however 'green' it is

[igottacabstar]

Ha Ha! Do you think that they won't tax any replacements? A cash cow is a cash cow however 'green' it is

 

At the moment they use the whole environment thing to justify the tax - how would they be able to justify taxing water at such a rate?

[skyhuck]

At the moment they use the whole environment thing to justify the tax - how would they be able to justify taxing water at such a rate?

 

They'd soon come up with a reason:cussing:

[Amelanchier]

You would still be emitting the biggest contributer to "climate change" - water vapour.

 

So - an emission tax would still hit you.

[igottacabstar]

I just can't see the government making any real effort to find an alternative to petrol/diesel until they really have to.

[Amelanchier]

Yep no reason for them to. Let the market find a niche. Capitalism will find a solution (ha ha)