Genepax Water Car: Too Good to be True? Yeah

The thing ihate about water powered cars and anything like fuel cells that need water is that its replacing one thing thats becoming scarce with another.

Why replace oil with water? Isnt most of the US having heat waves and water drying up ?

So why use water then for fuel?

majortom1981, the water used in fuel cells isn't disappearing. It is coming out of the tailpipe.

Basically, you take water, split it in two (hydrogen and oxygen), and then the fuel cell recombines it back into water. Nothing lost.

Maybe these ideas are great adjuncts, and will assist the user to get a positive gain in mpg.

Maybe I'll just wait for a little more :(
Stumbled!

nhick

Actually, water that comes out of tailpipes is essentially lost IMHO, much in the same way that water than you use to water your garden is also lost, into the ground or through evaporation. While it does go back into the environment, it doesn't necessarily return to the same area in the form of precipitation or find its way into underground reservoirs. In areas with water shortages, using water as fuel can be a problem, unless we can start running cars on urine.

Thank you Michael. This car has been making the rounds on a number of sites I read, and this is the first time someone has reminded us that the laws of thermodynamics still hold true -- and that this car is not truly water powered, and couldn't possibly be

Having said that, it's too bad that TreeHugger didn't catch this earlier. . .

whisky,

But if it was actually possible to use water as fuel - and I don't think it's possible - who says we'd import water from far away? and who says we'd have to use potable water? filtered gray water, or water straight from a nearby lake/river might do. And if demand is too high, maybe desalination plants running on solar/wind could be build..

In that sci-fi scenario, many ways could be found to mitigate that problem, which would be a much smaller problem than the one we have now with fossil fuels.

Great post, I'm emailing it to my uncle who's sure he's going to drive a water car any day now..

This is what happens when our schools focus on teaching self esteem instead of science.

Thank you for posting this clarification. It really depresses me to see so many people duped by these false claims of perpetual motion. It's a sad state of our educational system that students don't graduate with even the simplest science concepts like the law of thermodynamics.

That said, one intriguing thought occurred to me. The company, while intentionally misleading the public, has hinted at the REAL source of power: most likely metal hydride. It's an energy source where the energy is stored in the oxidation potential of the metal itself. And of course that energy potential must be manufactured somewhere, most likely using electricity as a source.

Now here's an interesting scenario. One of the biggest drawbacks to hydrogen fueled cars is the low energy density of hydrogen and the storage problems. Hydrogen cars are simply tricky, inefficient batteries, since they only store energy provided from another source.

But what is the energy density of metal hydrides? Especially in comparison to gasoline? If the spent hydride fuel could be efficiently recycled in a factory to store more energy, then this system might become essentially, a very efficient battery system, using electricity as the true energy source. The water is simply a reactant compound in the process that can be recycled in the car.

Unfortunately, I don't know enough about this metal reaction and the manufacture of hydrides to know if the conversion process is even efficient.

Any chemical experts out there??

I am very familiar with the laws of thermodynamics, but I find your attitude of dismissing it entirely is rather unscientific. If a car is driving around that claims to run on water, shouldn't we at least study it more closely before declaring it a fake? Honda is producing a car right now that runs on hydrogen (using a fuel cell). The hydrogen can be produced from water using solar energy to power the electrolysis. It is in a sense a water powered car.

John S, fuel cell cars run on hydrogen, not on water. You can get hydrogen *from* water, but you need to input more energy than you get as output.

This car claims to be running on water, and as the last paragraph of this article says, they'll need to come up with very convincing evidence before we can believe them.

Why has no made that great intellectual leap between the folly of these technology and the disadvantages of a hydrogen economy (i.e. neither actually do anything to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels). Unless the vast amounts of energy required to split water come from renewable sources but seeing as we have yet to shift all our domestic consumption to renewable energy...

"It is in a sense a water powered car."

Not in any sense that matters. The "power" is most certainly not coming from the water.

Kent- metal hydrides have long been used as a way to store hydrogen for use in fuel cell cars. They have advantages and disadvantages compared to other hydrogen storage methods. Probably more disadvantages on the whole. Google can tell you more.

its a fuel cell, plain and simple. The "water-powered" is a marketing gimmick. actually, its got a new idea on how to extract the hydrogen from the oxygen, so that's significant, but if you reported it as anything other than a novel fuel cell, then shame on you Treehugger....

"but if you reported it as anything other than a novel fuel cell, then shame on you Treehugger"

The company itself is not saying what it is, but their claims are very very very very very very dubious that it *only* takes water to make it go.

> The way it's usually done is with metal hydrides. These react with water to produce hydrogen, which is then used to power the car. But since these hydrides will deplete with time, they need to be replaced and so they are actually the fuel, not the water. And you can be sure that more energy will go into producing them than will be taken out, making them an energy carrier, just like a battery.

Good explanation.

I'd just like to buy an AC Reva / G-Wiz in the US with the same ~ 50 MPH top speed as what tey sell in the UK. Looking at the headline above and its reference to water.....well, if the batteries need topped up, I'll add distilled water :)

I just want to know why they're pouring Tidy-bowl toilet water into their water powered car. I mean seriously. Why is it blue?!?

About water being scarce ... here are a few suggestions that may make those who would otherwise oppose H2O powered cars:

1. Use the water from sewage treatment plants for these vehicles. It's a win-win for both parties, the local wastewater treatment plant would no longer be worried about dumping their water into the environment, cars would use it and convert it into clean air.

2. Desalinized water ... desalinized water is not drinkable water, and it's made from water that is on the earth abundantly - saltwater! The byproduct of this is sea salt and clean air.

I'm sure there are other ideas, these just come to mind. Time to make a difference ... let's get some cars that run on H2O!

This company has been very transparent so far. They're holding press releases and anyone can go there and meet with them in person to talk to them in person about it.

No point speculating from the armchair on how their technology "probably" works.

They don't claim to be a perpetual motion machine. They claim to not use fossil fuels and to not produce any carbon emissions. If they use a battery to achieve this, fine! They haven't lied or overstated their case.

I think the backlash they're getting is probably the one unfortunate side effect of taking the news public like this rather than going privately behind the scenes to find an investor. But they've done what they have to do. I have my own thoughts on why they took the news public in this way.

Come on people; why are you convinced that water is a fuel?

Repeat after me: WATER IS NOT A FUEL.
THERE IS NO CHEMICAL POTENTIAL ENERGY IN WATER.
H2O is VERY HAPPY BEING H2O and it will take a lot of energy to convince it otherwise.

You cannot burn water. It is already a product of combustion.

In chemical terms, water is a dead battery. You could, if you used energy, "charge" the dead battery by cracking it into H2 and O2, but the laws of thermodynamics dictate that the H2 and O2 will necessarily have LESS energy than what you used to make it. When you use it to power a car, you take another efficiency hit. The water is just a rechargeable battery in this system, and right now it is actually worse, for a lot of reasons, than existing batteries.

Stop wasting time on 'what ifs' because every time someone says that water is a fuel, they are lying to you or being intellectually dishonest.

As this article says, something with potential energy is electrolyzing or otherwise cracking the water and then that gas is being used in a fuel cell or an engine, but then that becomes the energy source, not the water...

water 4 gas cars has been around 50 years or more ,the only people trying to suppress this is you and big oil

water 4 gas cars has been around 50 years or more ,the only people trying to suppress this is you and big oil

What about HHO? A liquid fuel additive comprised of the same ratio of Oxygen and Hydrogen found in water? Still a liquid and a promising way to increase fuel mileage.

BOYCUTT ALL CARS THAT ARE LESS THAN 100 MPG

Do you want to see a quick resolution to the energy crisis?

The public should boycott from purchasing any vehicle that is less than 100 mpg.

That is surely to grab the automobile industry attention worldwide to produce an energy efficient car that does 100 mpg or better on alternative energy – the vehicle must be pollution free.

“The ‘big three’ is not the ‘big three’ anymore,” Iacocca told National Public Radio, referring to the falling sales of General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler. “[They] didn’t adapt quickly enough to the energy problem in this country [and were] not ready with the right kind of cars.”

Any big corporation that is too bureaucratic and cumbersome to quickly react to changing market conditions is doomed to failure.

In today’s fast moving market conditions and technology – you must be innovative, utilize the cutting edge of technology and produce a quality and economical product.

The public has a short memory, all they care is what have you done for me lately.

In life we must always live in hope.

You know, I've been spending quite a bit of time trying to find anybody online who's tried one of these water/gas hybrid conversion kits, who's complaining that it doesn't work. There ought to be SOMEBODY out there willing to say they were duped and wanted their money back.

I can't find 'em!

I'm seeing so MANY ads out now for the DIY instruction manuals, that I kept digging and digging for the truth, and you know where I found it?

The US Patent office!

At least two US inventors have earned patents from the USPTO by finding ways to extract energy from water without using more energy to extract it than they get out of it.

Here are links to those patents:
Stanley Meyer
Dennis Klein

I think what's going on here is Round Earth vs Flat Earth time. Even if it works splendidly, some people just cannot see it, much less believe it, since it does not fit the conventional science of the day.

Well, it seems to me there is some kind of leveraging process going on here to separate the Hydrogen from the Oxygen with only a little energy. Genepax is claiming some kind of membrane. I think the online conversion kits are using a resonance.

Every molecule, every living cell, has a resonance frequency at which it will disintegrate. I had thought, after all my reading on Rife.de that it would be the pharmaceutical companies that would fall first. But instead it's going to be big oil.

So I'm having a party over at my blog, and you're all invited! Crank up your speakers and dance!!

Using urine, as was said, is not a fantasy. We can, and many counties do, recycle wastewater, purifying it until it is cleaner than the water that came out of the aquifers and was sent into the municipal supply in the first place. This will certainly ease pressure on water supplies, at least water for residential use.

But yes, if we are going to continue to need more water for agriculture and industry we will have to move to large-scale desalination. And we will need lots of green energy to do it.

The saddest thing about media attention to "water powered cars" is that they perpetuate a total scam where good well meaning people invest in seeming promising technology with media coverage.

Being scammed on future technology is one problem, having Grannie scammed out of her retirement savings is quite another.

These schemes and scams need debunked every time.

To those who believe its possible:
What is water? H and O2 (sorry for the lack of subscript). Hydrogen and Oxygen make for a wonderful reaction when ignited, we know that from the space shuttle main rockets. Now ask yourself, how do you split water into the two seperate elements? With another source of energy. Are we assuming that once stared it creates more energy from H2 and O2 reactions? Now, prove me wrong, but so far, no one has ever created a perpetual motion machine correct? Now, if we are to assume this car runs off water alone, once started, this would power the world with its infinite source of power.

Yeah, its that silly. Those who have said its a simple fuel cell are more likely correct than those who blindly believe you can power anything with just water.

The human body is the most efficient energy converter I can think of, and we still aren't any where near 100% fuel => work conversion.

Prove me wrong with these stats, as these are fly by the seat of my pants college physics and chemistry understandings.

Seems like a lot of steps are wasted in converting water to work, more so than conventional ICE's.

The metal hydride is an energy storage medium, as are hydrogen tanks on a regular fuel-cell car. The question is, what is the energy density of these media and how efficient is the whole process of making the hydrides or making the hydrogen and then running the car on the hydrogen. How does this compare to other battery technologies?

I've been upset for years with the way the media has been covering hydrogen fuel-cell cars. They almost always treat the hydrogen as a primary fuel ( the Universe is mostly made out of hydrogen!) rather than as an energy storage medium, thereby confusing people completely as to what this technology is about.

Frankly, the entire energy debate in this country is on the same level. Until people understand what a primary and secondary energy source is , we won't get far.

As to those worrying about wasting water as a "fuel", I hope you are joking. The per capita water consumption in the USA is over 1,200 gallons a day - most of this is used for agriculture and manufacturing. A few gallons to "fuel" a car are inconsequential.

okay I give credit to the guy for trying to find an alternative but the alternative is not sufficient enough to subsitute gas in cars-what needs to be eliminated are those gas guzzlers (ex Hummers, obviously) and promote more bicycling :)

THANK YOU, for trying to debunk this myth. I have been trying to fight this scam, and the recent Air Car scam (to be manufactured by a company in India who is probably just trying to boost their stocks temporarily) for some time on my blog linked in my contact info above, also referencing thermodynamics and the perpetual motion machine myths.

To those that worry about wasting water, you are missing the point: This water technology is not possible - period!

As for authentic hydrogen car technology, the idea is different. Instead of "manufacturing" the fuel inside your own vehicle like the water car people want you to think is possible, the hydrogen car uses H2 and O2 separated elsewhere - ideally at the source of an abundant, green energy supply such as a wind farm.

The water created by the recombination of (2) H2 = (1) O2 will either evaporate or remain locally in the ground, but that's fine in a drought area because it recharges the micro-weather cycle (to a very minute amount.)

Part of the drought problem is caused by the destruction of micro-weather patterns, i.e., the re-evaporation of water locally only to precipitate in a nearby area in repeating cycles. When you flush the toilet, you short-circuit the micro-climate and send water down the freeway full-speed into the ocean, instead of it soaking into the ground or evaporating, and thus doing some more community service on the way to the ocean.

In the end, the point is - stop desperately searching for the quick solution to a long-term problem. We simply need to conserve more energy and live within our means. We are far too materialistic as a society.

This is probably not going to change people like Jeff. Infact I don't even know if what I'm talking about is 100% correct because my PhD isn't in Chemistry. But according to this site http://brownsgas.wordpress.com/ and the given references, there seem to be wee respected individuals that have been nominated for the Nobel prize in both Chemistry and Physics, that think there is more to this than what Jeff says. Don't stop by reading that site, go to google and type in that guy's name and his gas etc and see what you get. People also need to be open minded, just because you were taught something in school, doesn't mean it is necessarily 100% correct, science evolves.

Some may say:
School is essentially for fools; if the individual remains close minded about possibilities and truths arising in time that debunk their traditional teachings and knowledge of past theories, histories and truths.

With all the debates about our energy sources and their evolving technologies, no matter what extreme you're on, we can and should all agree that change is in need and is also inevitable, it is our only Constant.

For all those that disagree with the 'water powered energy' theory and experiments- do yourself and people a favour by researching why it is claimed to work and study the science behind it.

For all those that oppose the ideas of those that find Water, as our fuel resource, as folly- take a chance and research into the science behind this, why would water powered machinery not work or work effieciently?

If this occurs we can all get a better idea of each extreme and be ready to move foward to a new understanding; and drop our egos inorder to adapt to our ever changing consciouness. A lot of folk out there flap their mouths about their opions which they only received through another mouth with no research or data to back it up, or minimal amounts. A poser some can say. Hey, be true to yourself and do more than 'the talk'.

Loved reading all the entries on this page..
keep expanding those minds people, that's all we can do, no matter what situation we're in...

and it's true...all cells and molecules have energy (it has been measured time and time again) and anything is possible if that exists...

Why do so many people insist on ignoring basic science?

Because it's hard. Because it takes effort to study. Because it's so easy to feel good about yourself and give lectures to real scientists and engineers about being "open-minded", even an English Lit major can elevate himself [in his own mind, and to the applause of many other ignorant fools who want to pretend to be smart] above a PhD (well not just "A" Phd, but ALL people over the centuries in the hard sciences who slaved for years in laboratories while the English Lit major was getting high and banging granola chicks)

Trust us engineers and scientists. Or just trust common sense. YOU CAN'T GET SOMETHING FOR NOTHING.

WATER IS NOT a fuel. You can never egt out more than you put in. There's no such thing as an inexhaustible energy source, which is exactly what this "water-powered" car would be.
Con men are everywhere, but if con men claim to be environmentalists, they tend to get lots of non-critical help from the media. Pathetic.

Turnabout is fair play. How about you non-science types start writing novels with only 1 letter. Why constrain yourself to 26 like everyone else? Because that's what you were taught in school, right? Don't be so closed minded! Clearly all English Lit majors are slaves to tradition. I'm so glad that I'm better at creative writing than every poet who ever lived, because I have an "open mind" and don't need to use 26 letters.

A. Aaaaaa, aaA, "AAAAaaaa" Aaaa,aaa, aaaaaaa. Aa a. Aaaaa aaa aaaa aaa aaaaaaaa aaa a aaaaaa!

Now give me my Nobel Prize in Literature.

BTW, ANYONE can get a US patent for anything, and plenty of perpetual motion machines NONE OF WHICH WORK, are patented. The US patent office just wants the application fees. Some kook wants to send in a perpetual miton design? Tthey'll happily take the $150 and rubber stamp it. How low they have fallen.

What's the problem with calling it a water powered car ?

Why there is little objection on people calling our conventional automobiles as "Gasoline powered car" ?

The reason i'm questioning this is our precious gasoline was originally refined from crude oil ( energy was expended ), the crude oil was extracted from the oil rig ( again energy is expended ). war has been fought to secure or steal oil field from another nation ( energy and life are expended ). We should have callled our conventional car a "human-blood + oil rig powered car" as that is the original source of energy expended to powers our car. Muahahaha

Kenneth, you missed the point.

It's true that energy is used to extract and refine oil, but at the end of the process, you still get more energy than you put in.

With metal hydrides, none of the energy comes from water. It comes from the production of the hydrides, and there you get less out of it than you put in, hence the problem.

What's the problem with calling it a water powered car ?

Why there is little objection on people calling our conventional automobiles as "Gasoline powered car" ?

The reason i'm questioning this is our precious gasoline was originally refined from crude oil ( energy was expended ), the crude oil was extracted from the oil rig ( again energy is expended ). war has been fought to secure or steal oil field from another nation ( energy and life are expended ). We should have callled our conventional car a "human-blood + oil rig powered car" as that is the original source of energy expended to powers our car. Muahahaha

"BTW, ANYONE can get a US patent for anything, and plenty of perpetual motion machines NONE OF WHICH WORK, are patented. The US patent office just wants the application fees. Some kook wants to send in a perpetual miton design? Tthey'll happily take the $150 and rubber stamp it. How low they have fallen."

I have a coworker who holds a patent on something that doesn't work!!! I'm the one that discovered it, and pointed it out to him. He did determine a way for it to work with minor modifications, and did refile a new patent to protect the intellectual property, but it goes to show that you can indeed patent something that doesn't work (even if it wasn't on purpose)

That said, I got bored one day and did design a car that runs solely on water.

A large "roof" that funnels rain water into a water tank up high on a tower. Once full, a valve could be opened using the stored potential energy to turn a impeller which in turn is geared down to drive the rear wheels.

Not practical, but I thought it would be a fun thing to show off. Maybe I'll have to build it and get some VC money thrown my way....

:)