The Never-Ending Dream Of Water-Powered Car
NOT GONNA HAPPEN
There's some ideas that will never die, not because of the actual value of the idea, but because of the value of the idea of the idea. The water-powered car is one of these ideas.
The idea itself— to build a car that runs on ordinary water— is total crap, scientifically. It violates at least one law of physics, and pisses off a few others. But the idea behind the idea— a car that runs on something so plentiful and cheap it's almost valueless— will never go away. It's just too tantalizing to give up.
And that's why last month, yet another contender stepped forward to claim the nonexistent prize of a water-powered car. This time, it was in Pakistan. Almost a century ago, in 1916, this same claim was made by an American. And in between there have been many others, all of whom dreamed of filling their cars up with a garden hose. Well, that, and taking as much money from hopeful rubes as possible.
This type of SCAM has resurfaced.
You can't put in X amount of energy and get X+1. In a car you put in X amount of energy through burning fossil fuels to drive the engine, you then get X-1 in kinetic energy because of losses as heat etc...
The proposal for a water powered car is put in X energy to a "transformer" which converts the water to fuel, get out X-? then put that into the engine to get X-?? in kinetic energy (and heat loss).
Duh!
No, it wouldn't produce CO it would produce CO2 (as water vapour) the biggest and worst greenhouse gas of all and the biggest contributor to global warming.
LP, The efficiency of the engine was just a wild guess to make a point..it could be less or more.
Yes, from the environmental perspective it apparently makes sense but to split the water one needs energy from another fuel or any renewable source. If someone can use solar energy to split water, then solar cars would be more efficient theoritically and we wouldn't need water at all.
Or find a more stable compound of hydrogen than water to get higher energy levels at the ignition point.
And, the efficiency of current fuel engines is a mere 35% at maximum. So, 65% are also wasted as heat and mechanical energy!
KR, at least it wouldn't be CO!
There's no point in splitting water by putting in 100 joules and then getting back, lets say, 70 joules in the reverse reaction to run the car. The rest 30 joules would be wasted as heat and mechanical losses.
Sad if people are taken in by the Pakistani guy
may the steam will be the source to drive engine,but how it will produce steam???
there must be initial source of heating.right?
OPS FORGOT THE LINK
http://jalopnik.com/5944443/the-never+ending-dream-of-the-water+powered-car