Cooking with Hydrogen.

[NateRC36]

I have to say you guys will be proven wrong! These so called "laws" are stipulated by a man, who is himself not infallible. The laws are so dated, take the laws of Thermodynamics for example - they were made before the introduction of high oscilation square tooth wave forms, low power ICs didn't exist.... the second law of thermodynamics was established in the 1820's (when man thought airtravel was impossible) so do you really think that they still stand true today with the amount of advancements made in other areas?

:beatdeadhorse:

Hmmm, either that or I've taken too many blue pills...

[Serenity_VFR]

Of course everything I say here will only make y'all think I'm "a suit", "the man", "brainwashed by big oil", "too stupid to understand the intricacies of the technology", etc.

The real question is why you CARE so much that some ingenious person is laboring away "wasting" his energy doing something that you insist is impossible.

Start looking at the root cause behind this need and the rest of the situation becomes a lot clearer IMHO.

[NateRC36]

The real question is why you CARE so much that some ingenious person is laboring away "wasting" his energy doing something that you insist is impossible.

Start looking at the root cause behind this need and the rest of the situation becomes a lot clearer IMHO.

The root cause is how Joe Public has been "conditioned" by an education system controlled by a governing body funded by oil companies....

TBH no one person can do anything about it - but people's eyes are opening thanks to the internet and the immense wealth of information available to anyone with the motivation to use it.

[Trace]

Regarding conspiracy theories.. take the Diesel engine for example.... ....the inventor was murdered and the engine was reborn years lator to run on a by product of oil refining!

The oil companies are very powerful and they dictate almost every aspect of our lives.....

I have to say you guys will be proven wrong! These so called "laws" are stipulated by a man, who is himself not infallible. The laws are so dated, take the laws of Thermodynamics for example - they were made before the introduction of high oscilation square tooth wave forms, low power ICs didn't exist.... the second law of thermodynamics was established in the 1820's (when man thought airtravel was impossible) so do you really think that they still stand true today with the amount of advancements made in other areas?

The root cause is how Joe Public has been "conditioned" by an education system controlled by a governing body funded by oil companies....

TBH no one person can do anything about it - but people's eyes are opening thanks to the internet and the immense wealth of information available to anyone with the motivation to use it.

Wow! You are really "out there", aren't you? That's the first time I've ever heard anyone suggest that the Laws of Thermo are "dated". Has the force of gravity changed, too? So much for all my wasted years in engineering school....

As for the vast amount of information on the Internet (and as Kaldek touched on in both of his well-stated posts, above), it can provide an immense wealth of psuedo-scientific nonsense and conspriacy theories that Lotus Eaters can latch onto and proclaim as "proof". :beatdeadhorse:

As for JES, I totally agree that he has done a fine job of defending his position with gentlemanly responses and discussion. I just don't believe in HHO at all.

Solyent green is people!!

[Serenity_VFR]

Wow! You are really "out there", aren't you? That's the first time I've ever heard anyone suggest that the Laws of Thermo are "dated". Has the force of gravity changed, too? So much for all my wasted years in engineering school....

As for the vast amount of information on the Internet (and as Kaldek touched on in both of his well-stated posts, above), it can provide an immense wealth of psuedo-scientific nonsense and conspriacy theories that Lotus Eaters can latch onto and proclaim as "proof". :beatdeadhorse:

As for JES, I totally agree that he has done a fine job of defending his position with gentlemanly responses and discussion. I just don't believe in HHO at all.

Solyent green is people!!

Lotus eaters? Good thing your degree is in Engineering rather than Greek mythology (or English, for that matter! ;)

Apathy? Narcotic trance? -I can't see the link between that and the "conspiracy buffs." I'd accept Hoi Polloi maybe, if it were a popularly-held belief (like the 100MPH carburetor) but if I were grading your paper I'd certainly mark down for poor word choices, spelling, and grammar. I always try to at least get my spelling and grammar right before I attempt to talk down to someone else -much less call them lotus-eaters...

:mellow:

[Tightwad]

I think it is silly to argue about whether it will work…let the tests prove it…and then argue about the testing methodology. Throwing insults around is useless and won’t do anything but create ill will.

[checksix]

Those pesky laws of gravity, thermodynamics, and electrodynamics are soooo dated. I mean, like, nothing's changed since the 1880's! They really need to be updated for the intarweb age.

[Serenity_VFR]

I think it is silly to argue about whether it will work…let the tests prove it…and then argue about the testing methodology. Throwing insults around is useless and won’t do anything but create ill will.

I, for one, would like to see a video of the tank working and doing its thing.

This thing would be worth it just for the "mad scientist" cosmetic points. In a world where people waste time polishing their rims, putting on hugger fenders and rear-fender eliminators, converting to high and under-tail exhausts (heck, all after-market exhausts in any case other than crash or severe rust damage), and a whole host of cosmetic and silly add-ons that don't do diddly to real performance (not that high-performance is even needed on the street in real-world, non-track, riding), I can't see why people are so up in arms and out to "prove" that this is scientifically unfounded and a huge "waste of time and effort."

It's funny how this subject brings out the haterz in force.

[Rice]

I don't see this problem as overcoming the laws of thermodynamics.

A catalyst is introduced into the system that is claimed to improve combustion.

Noone claims that that there is no loss in producing the catalyst.

However IF the energy expanded on producing it is less than the gains realized from its use, then we have a net gain.

If this is treated as a scientific experiment, then we can not really prove or disprove it by burning gas in a calorimeter with and w/o HHO and measuring the change in temperature less the 'cost' of producing HHO.

Real world combustion adds other variables to this equation, that just might tip the net gain in favor of HHO.

It is no secret that the i-net is full of BS claims. Sometimes the only way to know for sure is to try it yourself or, like in this case, watch someone who can be trusted do it for you. (we can trust you, right, Jes? :cheerleader:)

So IMHO, it is a win-win situation, where all outcomes are positive. Even if it turns out that this claim can't be supported, we will all learn something valuable.

Go Jes! :goofy:

[NateRC36]

Since when did I mention gravity? I was referring to the laws that supposedly applied to the electrolysis methods used in this example and other HHO production systems...

I'm gonna take the high road and not insult you!

Nate :cheerleader:

Edited May 18, 2010 by NateRC36

[NateRC36]

oh BTW, I have a HNC in Engineering, originally being an Instrumentation engineer by trade...

[Guest Beaver]

Enough gallivanting. Results, Jes?

[JES_VFR]

Umm... not quite the same as your setup, but, - http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/how-fcx-works.aspx

James May reviewed it during an episode of Top Gear.

And I happen to like my VTEC, a lot... :biggrin:

Hey go and like your Vtec all you want. I personally just see it as "chest beating" grandstanding moment from Honda, it did not significantly improve the VFR, but gave Honda the ability to say "we were the first". Hey the soviets were the first into space and you can see where it got them, right?!?!?!

As for that Honda, they are storing Hydrogen on board, not producing it, so they still have to deal with storage, supply infrastructure and energy density issues.

I'm sort of keeping half an eye it, but it so far is just looks like another token Hydrogen/electric hybrid.

So your saying that good ideas can only come from the "best engineers in the world". Wait aren't these the same Engineers that gave us the Half-assed Vtec on the 2002? Or the mighty GM Impact? Or the Ponitac Aztek? Or another number of disasters, including the last wave of gas guzzling SUV's???

Hardly. I'm thinking more the folks at MIT, CalTech, Stanford, et al. These are guys that create the stuff which eventually makes its way to the corporates. I see none of those guys giving weight to the whole HHO idea.

There are people from MIT, CalTech and other engineering universities on some of these forums all working on HHO technology. In fact these guys believe in it so much that they are doing the research on shoestring budgets, since there is very little funding for HHO research right now.

HHO is not one of Pet technologies (like wind, solar, Bio-diesel and a few others), so it's not as easy to get backing.

It reminds me of some Aussie fellas who had "invented" a backyard perpetual motion machine. It used permanent magnets that - once you started spinning it by hand - kept it spinning forever and ever and generating electricity. They were TOTALLY CONVINCED it worked - TOTALLY. When actual physicists came in and PROVED it was total bollocks, they didn't accept it, because they were unable to actually comprehend the laws of physics properly.

I remember some of those stories, and the scammers with their junkyard HHO devices do not help any of the alternative energy movement either.

The fundamental problem here is that the people coming up with these ideas don't understand physics enough to prove themselves wrong. They only know enough to keep proving themselves right, and are constantly surprised when they can't get energy out of the system. But they KEEP GOING because they don't have the ability to prove themselves wrong.

A good scientist knows when to call something a dead end. A bad scientist wastes his entire life on it with nothing to show for it except conviction.

Of course everything I say here will only make y'all think I'm "a suit", "the man", "brainwashed by big oil", "too stupid to understand the intricacies of the technology", etc.

Well it makes me wonder why you are so anxious to put me off the research.

I'm not trying to sell anyone here anything, I'm not trying to force anyone here to have any real involvement with this.

I'm only trying to share my experiments and my results with a group of people that I felt were enthusiasts at some level.

If this all turns out to be a bust, then your welcome to be the first to say "I told you so".

I have to say you guys will be proven wrong! These so called "laws" are stipulated by a man, who is himself not infallible. The laws are so dated, take the laws of Thermodynamics for example - they were made before the introduction of high oscilation square tooth wave forms, low power ICs didn't exist.... the second law of thermodynamics was established in the 1820's (when man thought airtravel was impossible) so do you really think that they still stand true today with the amount of advancements made in other areas?

I don't think that there is anything particularly wrong with these "laws" of science. What I think we as people lack at this time, is sufficient understanding of how much certain conditions (like how fast something is comsumed) has on all the other aspects of the process and the overall results.

Of course everything I say here will only make y'all think I'm "a suit", "the man", "brainwashed by big oil", "too stupid to understand the intricacies of the technology", etc.

The real question is why you CARE so much that some ingenious person is laboring away "wasting" his energy doing something that you insist is impossible.

Start looking at the root cause behind this need and the rest of the situation becomes a lot clearer IMHO.

As I said, I wonder what Kaldek's motives to discourage me are. If they are because you attempted this sort of thing and failed, so you are trying to keep me from repeating your lack of success then I thank you, but I'm still going to try everything I can think of to make this work.

If your comments come from the absolute knowledge that some law of science is about to be violated, then please show me the equations that prove your stand point.

I honestly don't see my experiment as violating any 'laws' of nature, I just see it playing with the speed of the reactions to take advantage of what is already there.

Regarding conspiracy theories.. take the Diesel engine for example.... ....the inventor was murdered and the engine was reborn years lator to run on a by product of oil refining!

The oil companies are very powerful and they dictate almost every aspect of our lives.....

I have to say you guys will be proven wrong! These so called "laws" are stipulated by a man, who is himself not infallible. The laws are so dated, take the laws of Thermodynamics for example - they were made before the introduction of high oscilation square tooth wave forms, low power ICs didn't exist.... the second law of thermodynamics was established in the 1820's (when man thought airtravel was impossible) so do you really think that they still stand true today with the amount of advancements made in other areas?

The root cause is how Joe Public has been "conditioned" by an education system controlled by a governing body funded by oil companies....

TBH no one person can do anything about it - but people's eyes are opening thanks to the internet and the immense wealth of information available to anyone with the motivation to use it.

Wow! You are really "out there", aren't you? That's the first time I've ever heard anyone suggest that the Laws of Thermo are "dated". Has the force of gravity changed, too? So much for all my wasted years in engineering school....

As for the vast amount of information on the Internet (and as Kaldek touched on in both of his well-stated posts, above), it can provide an immense wealth of psuedo-scientific nonsense and conspriacy theories that Lotus Eaters can latch onto and proclaim as "proof". :lurk:

As for JES, I totally agree that he has done a fine job of defending his position with gentlemanly responses and discussion. I just don't believe in HHO at all.

Solyent green is people!!

Trace, You are welcome to believe whatever you want to believe about HHO. I don't have data to prove or disprove my position yet. I hope that when I have gathered data, that you will reconsider your position and participate in further discussion of testing and the value of the results.

I think it is silly to argue about whether it will work…let the tests prove it…and then argue about the testing methodology. Throwing insults around is useless and won’t do anything but create ill will.

I, for one, would like to see a video of the tank working and doing its thing.

This thing would be worth it just for the "mad scientist" cosmetic points. In a world where people waste time polishing their rims, putting on hugger fenders and rear-fender eliminators, converting to high and under-tail exhausts (heck, all after-market exhausts in any case other than crash or severe rust damage), and a whole host of cosmetic and silly add-ons that don't do diddly to real performance (not that high-performance is even needed on the street in real-world, non-track, riding), I can't see why people are so up in arms and out to "prove" that this is scientifically unfounded and a huge "waste of time and effort."

It's funny how this subject brings out the haterz in force.

Well I do have video of the gas cell running, that I shot when I was testing the cell installation for leaks. I did not record the specific volume at that time, because I was more concerned with the tubing runs, fitting of a last few components and issues like the pump heating up.

It is large file and I do not have a place to host it right now. If someone wants to see parts of it, I can try to cut it down to something I can mail or upload here.

If someone has a site or a suggestion on a fairly secure site to host it, then please let me know. I just don't want to put it up on you tube and have it hacked or stolen.

I don't see this problem as overcoming the laws of thermodynamics.

A catalyst is introduced into the system that is claimed to improve combustion.

No one claims that that there is no loss in producing the catalyst.

However IF the energy expanded on producing it is less than the gains realized from its use, then we have a net gain.

If this is treated as a scientific experiment, then we can not really prove or disprove it by burning gas in a calorimeter with and w/o HHO and measuring the change in temperature less the 'cost' of producing HHO.

Real world combustion adds other variables to this equation, that just might tip the net gain in favor of HHO.

It is no secret that the i-net is full of BS claims. Sometimes the only way to know for sure is to try it yourself or, like in this case, watch someone who can be trusted do it for you. (we can trust you, right, Jes? :laughing6-hehe:)

So IMHO, it is a win-win situation, where all outcomes are positive. Even if it turns out that this claim can't be supported, we will all learn something valuable.

Go Jes! :biggrin:

That is exactly the point I reached. There is so much crap out there on the web, that I just finally said I have to try this and see for myself.

I doing the best I can with the micro sized budget that I have right now, but sometimes that is all you can do.

Honestly I think that some of the people here will learn a lot no matter which way this experiment goes. Some may be swayed in the end of the results are positive. Unfortunately there are a few that will not ever believe the results and have already made up their minds.

Forward I go, for everyone, even the adamant negative people.

I brought this here to share with our VFR family as knowledge gained, one way or the other.

Thank you for the questions big and small, don't be afraid to ask. I don't have all the answers, but I will do my best.

Edited May 19, 2010 by JES_VFR

[JES_VFR]

Well I hacked up the one video I shot covering the install and some of the leak testing.

It's pared down to just a short example of the cell making gas.

I don't know how to get embed the flickr player, so I'll just throw up a link to the whole page.

A short video of the cell making gas.

I realize that, I don't show it with the engine running and the cell drawing its power from the charging system, but it is just a quick and dirty hack job on some of the installation video I shot. I have quite a bit more video to work on and will be sending a it on to the company website, so it will eventually get there.

[NateRC36]

JES_VFR, Here's my cell.

Let me know if you'd like pictures from different angles. I have to replace one of the nylon plates as I over-tightened the anode terminal causing it to fracture, it's just cosmetic and it's still water tight - it just looks crap!

Nate

Edited May 19, 2010 by NateRC36

[TomG33]

Now they could be wrong and you could be correct, but I still don't think that is a deal breaking issue.

I mean we are dealing with liberating and utilizing KW's of additional power, or at the very minimum not wasting them like we were before.

a few watts to make the gas is not going to toss over the applecart.

once I get the led marker and brake lights and maybe the HID system, then I seriously doubt that it could still be an issue.

JES,

Thanks for the link. I read it and it does give a good insight into the workings of the R/R.

Personally I think you are wasting too much time pandering to all us Cynics. Spend your time getting the thing working and then let the results speak for themselves. I think that would be a much better way to utilize your energy.

You are right in saying that no matter who is right, It is not a deal breaker, I never said it was and I still believe that it isn't. Just some small numbers that have to be accounted for, nothing more.

For those that know me, I am a pedantic person, and ever since I started reading about how the R/R works, I have had this "Itch" about everybody keeps stating that the R/R disipates Excess alternator power. I really do not believe that this is the case.

I will leave it alone for now, do a little more exploring and perhaps start a separate thread about it, so as not to detract from the work you are doing.

Good Luck

Tom

[Serenity_VFR]

A short video of the cell making gas.

Foamy!

[JES_VFR]

JES_VFR, Here's my cell.

Let me know if you'd like pictures from different angles. I have to replace one of the nylon plates as I over-tightened the anode terminal causing it to fracture, it's just cosmetic and it's still water tight - it just looks crap!

Nate

That's pretty slick, it looks alot like a Smack gen IV.

Which was a good cell design. The challenge with that design was keeping the cells filled equally and/or keeping it running in a drycell configuration (too much fluid = wet cell).

I'd love to be able to keep that cell gap that close while still getting a fittings into each cell to circulate the electrolyte. Tapping the threads for the fittings requires a thicker manifold.

I'm working on reducing the gap as much as I can, nesting the plates and gaskets, while keeping the fittings in the manifold. It's never going to be that narrow though.

Edited May 20, 2010 by JES_VFR

[magicman]

As an open and inquisitive mind, I applaud you for your efforts and eagerly await results!

I think part of the reason this is not a popular technology is the whole power draw issue. How many of the people who would honestly consider building a rig to test it in the original pioneering days would have had a motorcycle to do it with. And more importantly, a Stator based charging system.

Best of luck, and be sure to continue to make regular updates with even minor results.

[NateRC36]

That's pretty slick, it looks alot like a Smack gen IV.

Which was a good cell design. The challenge with that design was keeping the cells filled equally and/or keeping it running in a drycell configuration (too much fluid = wet cell).

I'd love to be able to keep that cell gap that close while still getting a fittings into each cell to circulate the electrolyte. Tapping the threads for the fittings requires a thicker manifold.

I'm working on reducing the gap as much as I can, nesting the plates and gaskets, while keeping the fittings in the manifold. It's never going to be that narrow though.

Yes trapped air is a problem with this cell which is why I will run it on the pump for a while and rotate it until no more air bubbles up through the header tank. I just need to decide on what pump to use - I've found drill powered pumps and an wondering if I could adapt that to fit on the sprocket cover of my cb500 but I'll probably look at chemical processing industry for a low volume/low power pump.

I like how you have added an individual feed to each plate, mine is drilled in such a way that the electrolyte circulates and flows over all the surfaces which I think wouldn't be quite as efficient as your cell. One major fault with my layout is that if it's left to generate without the pump switched on pockets of gas will build up in small areas which would further reduce efficiency.

I really look forward to seeing your results!

Nate

[JES_VFR]

Yes trapped air is a problem with this cell which is why I will run it on the pump for a while and rotate it until no more air bubbles up through the header tank. I just need to decide on what pump to use - I've found drill powered pumps and an wondering if I could adapt that to fit on the sprocket cover of my cb500 but I'll probably look at chemical processing industry for a low volume/low power pump.

I like how you have added an individual feed to each plate, mine is drilled in such a way that the electrolyte circulates and flows over all the surfaces which I think wouldn't be quite as efficient as your cell. One major fault with my layout is that if it's left to generate without the pump switched on pockets of gas will build up in small areas which would further reduce efficiency.

I really look forward to seeing your results!

Nate

Well those drill powered pumps usually a huge 1/2 hose diameter and will probably generate way too much flow.

I know the little plastic fuel pump I'm using is good for 23 G/H which is more flow than I need, but it is rugged enough to last, it is a plastic pump so there are no issues with reaction or corrosion from the electrolyte. The running amp draw is about 1.5 amps, so its not a big loss and its a common off the part pump. I can get one from the local auto supply tomorrow if mine fails.

I wouldn't need one in my design if I had been able to mount the cell upright and I thought about changing the installation to get it mounted upright, but I'd still go with the pump.

The difference in gas production when I was testing the cell on a bench rig was very noticeable. Even when I wired it in series with the cell on the bench and cost the cell amps and volts, it still made more gas than without the pump.

I think that the pump generated flow sweeps the micro bubbles off the plates, keeping them wetted and producing gas.

[JES_VFR]

Well I was sure that I posted this earlier (or rather late last night), but I can't seem to find it now.

I've noticed a couple of small things and changed one detail as I ride around trying scrape up the coin for the Autotune module and a base dyno tune.

First the change,

I got a lot of questions, in emails and comments on other sites, on how was I measuring the amp draw of the cell and not the draw of the whole circuit.

Well the best answer is, I really wasn't. I had put a 15 amp fuse in BlueSea fusebox and would remove it, jumping around it get amp reading with my multimeter.

That would give me the total amperage of the circuit and since the pump nominally draws 1.6 amps running, I'd just do the math.

But in the interest of accurate measurements and because I could, I split the circuit, putting the pump circuit on an empty slot and sticking a 10 amp fuse in the cell circuit.

Then I dumb and forgot that the meter's amp reading mode is fused for 25 amps and tried to test the whole fusebox draw. Pop went the fuse and I don't have another yet (trip to hardware store tomorrow for fuses, check).

When I get the multimeter sorted, I'll be able to get a direct reading of the cells amp draw.

This was also spurred by a minor issue I had when ran the level in the main tank down to far and the pump started to suck gas back into the cell.

I refilled the tank and wanted to prime the cell so I could squeeze in those last few ml of water. But I really did not want to start and idle away the gas in the bike, nor did I just want to set the whole system load plus my 13amp drain on the battery without having the system charging it. Add in that if I start the bike and the cell runs it makes gas, building pressure in the tank right away, which makes filling it that last little bit a kind of challenge. That also drove the circuit separation I detailed above.

Now with just a jumper wire and pulling one fuse I can run the pump to fill the tank without making gas.

It only takes a minute or two to prime the cell that way so the less than 2 amp load won't kill the battery.

Secondly, I think I mentioned that when I first installed the cell and got it running, the idle speed increased noticeably (it was over 2000 rpm at about 180 degrees indicated on the temp gauge). I turned it down until it was below 1500 and will check it a little later with the PC V, but its stable for now and starts fine cold. I really didn't think anything more about it until just the other day while demonstrating the gas production for a friend.

The VFR was warmed up, as in coolant temp read 160 as soon as the panel lit up. I started the bike and it came to life with a normal sounding idle running about 1100-1200. Then close to 45 seconds after I started it up, the idle picked up to just under 1500 and the exhaust sound changed (there was more of a throb to it, don't know how else to describe it). Neither of us touched the throttle and we both looked at each other.

I'm guessing that is just the delay that occurs as the gas has to travel from the cell to the main tank bubble up into the outlet tube, then make its way forward to the second bubbler/drier/scrubber and bubble up through that again, then finally up to the intake and into engine.

While Jim was standing there I pulled the fuse, the idle dropped back down in about a minute and the exhaust sound settled as well.

I stuck the fuse back in and counted beats of my heart (hey I did not have watch with sweep hand or stop watch app in phone). I counted 58 beats and the exhaust note changed as the idle increased (for the record my resting heart rate is right on 78 beats a minute, that's just about 45 seconds).

I'll try and get some video of it with a stopwatch, but is just goes to show that something is noticeable even at idle with the cell running a safe (read low amp draw) electrolyte concentration.

[NateRC36]

If your bikes injection does it have an O2 sensor some where in the intake? If so the extra oxygen coming from the cell will be picked up by this and the system will add more fuel to compensate which will then increase the revs. This will also lead to a lower MPG which is why you have to run the system a little leaner to compensate for this. The best option is to add a MAP sensor on a timer switch (or manual switch) that you can turn on when the revs rise (so this will give you a cell warm up period, similar to using a choke).

Nate

[ggathagan]

1st off:

I applaud John's work, regardless of the outcome.

2) To those who put forth the if it was a viable solution, it would have been out there already type of argument:

Prior to toro1 having the desire and the requisite skills/knowledge to put his kit together, no one made a bolt-on supercharger kit specifically designed for the VFR.

The fact that such a kit didn't exist prior to this point did not prove that it wasn't possible, only that someone with the desire and abilities to create one had not yet decided to put one together.

In a similar fashion, the fact that no one has yet used HHO gas production in this particular way, does not make it impossible. It simply means that no one has yet been interested enough to do the work.

That lack of interest may be due to any number of reasons, including economic.

One always has to remember that the matter of scale is always a factor when it comes to the implementation of technology with regard to automotive/motorcycle companies. ROI is always a part of the formula. Witness the demise of our beloved gear-driven cams.

One also has to remember the federal government has a lot to do with the direction and types of R&D in the automotive and oil industries. Tax incentives, research funding and government mandates all play a role.

Remember the formation of the Synthetic Fuels Corporation after the oil crisis of the late '70's and it's subsequent abandonment a mere 5 years later?

That resulted in Exxon abandoning the oil shale project it was working on on Colorado.

On a related note, it is the federal government that has mandated that both industries develop the use of ethanol, even though ethanol is a less efficient fuel, causes a host of longevity issues and ethanol production for fuel in the US has far-reaching agricultural ramifications.

As long as the current method of oil extraction is the most economical, it will be used.

That will change only when oil extracted with that method is no longer available, or another method is more economical.

3) Apart from being a fuel source, oil has many roles in many industries. Moving to an alternative fuel will not eliminate the desire for oil.

Since it is a finite resource, it makes sense from a business standpoint to develop alternative fuel, thus prolonging oil's life span in the other industries.

4) Unfortunately, the old adage of necessity being the mother of invention is true.

Human nature being what it is, the alternative solutions are never ready to implement ahead of time.

There will always be a lag-time when transitioning from one energy source to another.

[JES_VFR]

If your bikes injection does it have an O2 sensor some where in the intake? If so the extra oxygen coming from the cell will be picked up by this and the system will add more fuel to compensate which will then increase the revs. This will also lead to a lower MPG which is why you have to run the system a little leaner to compensate for this. The best option is to add a MAP sensor on a timer switch (or manual switch) that you can turn on when the revs rise (so this will give you a cell warm up period, similar to using a choke).

Nate

Yes, my bike is a 2001 so it has a catalyst and two o2 sensors in the exhaust as well as a map sensor connected to the throttle bodies. However, both of my O2 sensors are currently disconnected as part of the Power Commander installation is to replace them with 'O2 eliminators' (they are really just blank o2 sensor connector with a resistor across a couple of terminals to simulate the o2 sensors heater circuit).

O2 sensors always go in the exhaust to measure the post-combustion oxygen content. There are several issues with this ranging from:

1.The EPA actually Mandates a rich enough mixture to guarantee that the catalytic converter is kept up to operating temperature.

2.The reading from the oxygen sensor is taken post-combustion and applied to the calculation for future conditions, which may or may not be appropriate.

and there are other issues as well.

Now the AutoTune module will also install a wideband o2 sensor (most oem o2 sensors only handle a narrow range of readings corresponding to a what are considered normally acceptable AF ratios), but since the person tuning can set what they want the target AF ratios to be, it doesn't really matter. If the AutoTune O2 sensor consistently reads a false lean then just accept that as a target when the HHO is flowing and set a start up timer to let the oem computer handle fuel until the cell has ramped up.