Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - MikeM100

Is this another 'magic' device ? It looks wonderful ?

www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-4812942/B...l

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - RobJP

I have to confess, I deal with generators that work on a similar basis regularly - there's one in the workshop a few feet from the lab I'm in right now.

In most cases, the generator uses a saturated brine solution, which is put through electrolysis with de-ionised water. In the company I work for, the aim is the liquid that is produced, which is a highly effective biocide - but without the hazardous properties of some liquids. You can even gargle with it, or wash your hands in it. It's used in woundcare, in surface sterilising, medical device sterilisation, and even in IVF clinics for ensuring the zygotes (prior to implantation) are free of and biological hazards (they're being implanted directly to the womb). The sterilant works very well on bacteria, yeasts, moulds, even spores and prions, but is harmless to the zygote.

Basically, the electolysis produces hydrochlorous acid which we want - hydrogen iand oxygen gases are also produced, which we just vent away to the atmosphere By changing the setup of the cell, or altering the time the liguid spends in the cell, you can change the composition of the liquid produced, or make more (or less) gas, to suit.

By the looks of it, they've miniaturised the cell, they've changed the dwell time to keep the liquid in as long as possible, and they're just using saturated brine, no added water for dilution.

But I'll pass this on to my boss - we've got a number of patents in this area, will be interesting to know the exact makeup of the cell.

Edited by RobJP on 24/08/2017 at 12:22

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - bathtub tom

So the engine uses fuel to generate electricity to power this (electrolysis) device, but only the hydrogen is fed into the combustion chamber. Why not use the oxygen also? Isn't the point of nitrous oxide injection to feed more oxygen into an engine?

I wonder what volume of hydrogen it can produce. Consider a one litre engine running at 3K RPM. That's around fifteen hundred litres of air a minute it's sucking in. What proportion of hydrogen would be added to produce this miraculous 80% reduction in pollution and 20% improvement in economy?

Is my cynicism showing?

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - davecooper

I was wondering the same thing. I don't want to be cynical and it would be great if it worked but I find it difficult to believe that you could produce hydrogen at the rate required without using a large amount of power, so negating any improvements made by the system. I am happy to be corrected though.

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - Engineer Andy

So the engine uses fuel to generate electricity to power this (electrolysis) device, but only the hydrogen is fed into the combustion chamber. Why not use the oxygen also? Isn't the point of nitrous oxide injection to feed more oxygen into an engine?

I wonder what volume of hydrogen it can produce. Consider a one litre engine running at 3K RPM. That's around fifteen hundred litres of air a minute it's sucking in. What proportion of hydrogen would be added to produce this miraculous 80% reduction in pollution and 20% improvement in economy?

Is my cynicism showing?

Not to worry - you're not the only one. If his 'device' is so good, then they'd be car manufacturers beating a path to his door with wads of cash wanting to buy the patent off him. Funny how they aren't and he's likely selling this on his own website or eBay/Amazon etc. its likely that, whatever the 'device' does, it uses more electrical energy (which has to come from the petrol or diesel fuel) to make the hydrogen (or whatever) etc than could ever be 'saved' in a more efficient combustion process.

PS. See Aussie equivalent to HJ (though in typically Aussie style, far more 'direct'), John Cadogan's take on them (the whole video is on all such devices, but at 13mins he discussed an Aussie equivalent device doing ths same):

youtu.be/3ebR0yyPO_U?t=779

Edited by Engineer Andy on 24/08/2017 at 14:39

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - brum

Great youtube video!

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - Engineer Andy

Great youtube video!

He doesn't mince his words, does he? Sometimes he gets very close to the mark or even beyond it, but I suppose that may be considered 'normal' for Aussies, so I let it pass in the name of overall entertainment and, to be honest technical value of his videos. I've probably laughed out loud more watching his videos than some comedy shows - the sheer b@lls of the man going up against many vested interests and global manufacturers (who, if he done so in the UK, would be prepping their lawyers soon after watching!).

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - brum

Sigh....Yet another electrolysis kit....He may be a dab hand with electrolysis, but doubt he is an expert in combustion engine science.

Let me see....

Small device, using just 250ml? of "special fluid" (brine?) in 6000 miles. Thats not much.

Ceo (not the inventor) quotes

“Our patented technology generates hydrogen at an extremely low current with no hazardous bi-products,” hmm....so not much hydrogen, would explain why it doesnt use much brine.

“We have completed millions of miles of testing and the result is a credible and independently verified, low-maintenance product that could literally change the air we breathe, improve air quality on a global scale and save thousands of lives every year.” Millions of miles? Hmmm...Does the CEO even realise how many hours a day his inventor chums family needed to drive those 2 fiat puntos, vauxhall combo van and corsa to get in millions of miles...

‘We have completed testing of hundreds of vehicles at certified MoT stations and recorded an average 80 per cent reduction in overall emissions". Hmmm... since when did mot stations measure overall emissions? Does an idle test mean anything?

‘Less fuel is also used with real-world drivers reporting savings of up to 20 per cent.’ Yeah...theres that magic "up to" phrase again....

This smacks more of crowdfunded spin, (nice technobabble -ortho hydrogen, wow)

‘Over 100,000 cars fail their MoT each month on emissions alone in the UK. This technology tackles this problem head-on by reducing particulates and NOx.’ Hmm...But mot stations dont measure particulates or NOx.100,000 cars fail on emissions EVERY MONTH? 1.2 million failures every year.

Some of the CEO statements are clearly ficticous.

www.edie.net/news/6/New-hydrogen-technology-could-.../

Edited by brum on 24/08/2017 at 14:16

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - RobJP

Have to agree. I know how much energy our sterilant generator uses - it's a 3 phase supply that runs at 600 Amps - and that doesn't generate any large quantities of Hydrogen. We actually re-did the risk assessment for HSE a few months ago, and found that the calculations prevously done had over-counted the hydrogen 100 times over.

I'm sure that with a few 'tweaks' to the setup we could generate more hydrogen, but even if we increased the outupt ten-fold we'd still be in tiny quantities.

In fact, if the claims were true and they could generate enough hydrogen to make a difference, I'd be very interested in seeing some in-cylinder temperature numbers. Hydrogen burns very hot - hot enough for engine longevity to be a potential concern.

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - MikeM100

Interesting well informed opinions that confirm my scepticism.

It all seems a bit too physically small to produce the benefits that it puports to offer ? I cannot imagine that a couple of Amps at 12v would produce much oxygen

Interesting that the likes of Morgan are interested tjough?

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - galileo

If you have a simple battery charger, take the carbon electrodes from a used 6 Volt lantern battery and dangle them in a concentrated solution of common salt, apply voltage to them and you too can generate Hydrogen at one electrode and Chlorine at the other. (NB, do not breathe the Chlorine or continue the experiment for mone than a minute).

The hydrogen produced will be 75% ortho hy drogen and 25% para hydrogen. Both have the same density, chemical properties and flammability. Neither you nor an engine will tell the difference.

You will note if you carry out the experiment how small a volume of gas is produced - if the system is scaled up to produce enough for a significant volume to affect fuel consumption, it will be obvious that a big generator and a big tank of electrolyte will be necessary.

Reminiscent of the legendary additive that let you run a car on water which the big oil companies hushed up.

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - MikeM100

Hang On !

When you charge a car battery what 'inflamable' gas is given off from the battery - is it hydrogen ??

Perhaps the existing components (battery & alternator) in a vehicle could be used to generate hydrogen ?

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - Vitesse6

I think Jukes Verne used a similar idea to power the Nautilus in 20,000 leagues under the sea. Trouble is it's a perpetual motion machine and we all know how effective they are.

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - galileo

I think Jukes Verne used a similar idea to power the Nautilus in 20,000 leagues under the sea.

Trouble is it's a perpetual motion machine and we all know how effective they are.

Quite correct.

Unfortunately there is such widespread ignorance of basic science that a large number of people will believe these claimed inventions, some will even part with money to invest in them. A sad indictment of the dumbed down education system of the last few decades.

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - ExA35Owner

This device is given a plug in the Daily Fail's motoring column today, with no crtitcal analysis at all. Not good journalism but good advertising!

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - brum

Its whats known as an advertorial. DM is full of them.

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - Engineer Andy

This device is given a plug in the Daily Fail's motoring column today, with no crtitcal analysis at all. Not good journalism but good advertising!

Personally speaking its a bit rich of such newspapers doing so, given they LOVE to rant 'on the side of the consumer' when a story breaks about the public being 'ripped off' by some firm selling 'snake oil' or suchlike.

Sadly even the DT is not immune from this sort of thing, and, in my view, often 'skates over' many serious relaibility/customer service issues in many cars and car manufacturers, giving some way too high a rating when reviewed. John Cadogan (see my earlier post) goes further (at least regarding Australian motoring jounos, though he implies it happens worldwide) in alledging backhand coprorate bribery by essentially fying journos first class to test sites, putting them up in 5-star hotels and wining and dining them on the corporate expense account - no wonder why so many give certain makes a continued thumbs up.

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - Terry W
If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true.

Not a bad attitude to take with any potential scam!
Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - Sofa Spud

Reminiscent of the legendary additive that let you run a car on water which the big oil companies hushed up.

. . . To protect their sales of an additive they sell that enables cars to run on air !!!

Too Good to be True - Retrofit Pollution Device - Mchenry

The teams of highly-educated specialists with budgets measured in billions at GM, Ford, Toyota, VW, etc., were too stupid to think of this, and now some guy who isn't even a chemist pottering around in his garage has shown them how to do it. Makes you proud to be British!

 

Ask Honest John

Value my car