Originally posted by wikipedia:

---

The energy required to generate the oxyhydrogen always exceeds the energy released by combusting it

---

Originally posted by varnull:

---

No worries.. the maths proves you will take always take more energy from the system than you are putting in .. 1st law of thermodynamics.

Something else I didn't even factor in is the best IC engines only have a fuel to power conversion ratio of around 40% .. not a lot of point taking another 5% of that final energy to create "fuel" which at best can put back only 70% .. and that's a hell of an optimistic figure.. of that 5%.

These devices will actually cause an increase in overall fuel consumption .. the engine has to supply that power from somewhere and it's only source is from the fuel it burns..

There are other problems too which nobody (well a few have) taken into account.. modern computer fuel/efficiency management systems. ghanging the fuel/air mix will screw with those and pretty much guarantee damage.. There are real witness reports of people testing these devices and either burning more fuel or seeing changes because they change the way they drive.

One university test I remember reading reported a 0.5% increase in fuel efficiency over a vehicle where the equipment was carried but not turned on .. but overall a loss of 8% against the same vehicle without any modifications at all.

Of course the scammers will have thousands of people saying otherwise on their sites.. like all good snake oil sellers they sound so convincing.. that's the old con artist trick all over again.. placebo effect.. a known and proven fact. If you think it's saving you money maybe you use your car less.. or you drive differently because you are thinking efficient.... it can't possibly be from a device which at best on a single cell made of a couple of bits of wire twisted in a jar is making 1.5 litres of gas a minute taking engine power to do it (that takes something like 40AH to make that much gas.. the entire output of the alternator .. not free power.. actually a significant drag.. perhaps 10% of the engine power on a small engine) and feeding that gas into an engine sucking in 2500 litres of air a minute idling .. now you see how ridiculous all these 20 and 30% efficiency gains look?

NASA in the 60's got a boost.. using bottled hydrogen . the way forward is the hydrogen fuel cell and electric motors.. these cars exist .. but only 5% of the worlds hydrogen is obtained from renewable sources.. solar/electrolytic (because it is so inefficient) ..all the rest is coming from the same fossil fuels. It may be clean to burn hydrogen.. but how clean is it to make it??

---