Ionizationx: a clean environment is a human right!

Stanley Meyer => Stan Meyers system 3 => Topic started by: Steve on February 15, 2010, 13:39:49 pm

Title: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 15, 2010, 13:39:49 pm
The theory is that the ionized nitrogen of the ambient is bounding with the hydrogen from our electrolysis proces.

Here some info about the usage of ammonia.

Steve


Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 15, 2010, 13:41:20 pm
Addiction to imported petroleum carries with it huge economic, environmental and national security risks for the United States and other developed countries. The search for a domestically produced, economical and environmentally friendly fuel has led to one acceptable solution, anhydrous ammonia. Also known as "the other hydrogen", ammonia is the closest thing to a perfect transportation fuel.
Ammonia is an ultra-clean, energy-dense alternative liquid fuel. Along with hydrogen, ammonia is the only fuel that does not produce any greenhouse gases (GHG) on combustion.

Hydrogen combustion: 2H2 + O2 > 2H2O (water vapor)

Ammonia combustion: 4NH3 + 3O2 >  2N2 + 6H2O (nitrogen and water vapor)

Also, ammonia is...

Practical

Ammonia (anhydrous, NH3) is 18% hydrogen by weight
Ammonia is a liquid fuel at ambient temperatures and moderate pressures (~125 psi)
Ammonia has 52% of the energy density of gasoline, and is over 50% more energy dense per gallon than cryogenic liquid hydrogen
It can be used directly to drive fuel cells, or directly in internal combustion engines (ICE), it can also be used in combustion turbines
Conversions of gasoline and diesel ICEs to run on ammonia are relatively straightforward
Ammonia is easy to store and deliver in large quantities
Ammonia represents a sustainable, carbon-free fuel for back-up and peaker capacity generation
Ammonia fuel can help free us from dependence on imported oil
Available

Current worldwide annual production of ammonia is ~130 million tons, primarily from natural gas and coal; China is the #1 producer at 30 million tons annually
~ 20 million tons of NH3 and NH3-based fertilizers are consumed annually in the US as fertilizer (equivalent in energy to ~3.5 billion gallons of gasoline)
A storage and delivery infrastructure of pipelines, barges, rail and truck already exists for ammonia, with 3000 miles of pipeline in the US heartland; retail ammonia outlets exist in practically every state, 800 outlets in Iowa alone
Ammonia can be produced cleanly from coal and natural gas with carbon sequestration, and also from biomass, renewable energy sources and nuclear power, using nitrogen from the air
Ammonia can also be recovered from agricultural animal waste
Ammonia is also produced naturally in legumes by nitrogenase bacteria
Ammonia is covered as an alternative fuel under the Energy Policy Act of 1992, so ammonia vehicles qualify for fleet sale requirements
Low/Stable Cost

Ammonia is comparable to or lower in price than gasoline on an equal energy basis
Ammonia made using renewable or nuclear source electricity will be more stable in price and will grow increasingly cheaper per Btu versus fossil based fuels
Environmentally Friendly

Ammonia contains no carbon, so releases no GHGs on combustion; also any NOx is easily neutralized
In accident scenarios, ammonia is not flammable and is lighter than air so will dissipate into the atmosphere
Ammonia is not itself a GHG in the atmosphere
Ammonia will not damage the ozone layer
Anhydrous ammonia itself is used as the active chemical reactant in NOx reduction, and CO2 and SO2 capture
 
 
Properties of Selected Fuels in their Liquid State (sorted by H2 Density)
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 15, 2010, 13:41:39 pm
Ammonia Fuel
Yes, we are talking about anhydrous ammonia (NH3) as a fuel and it's the same stuff that farmers inject into the ground as fertilizer.  Because it does not occur naturally in its pure form on our planet and must be manufactured, we can consider it an energy carrier rather than an energy source.  Be that as it may, we will consider anhydrous ammonia as a fuel.

Some might think that ethanol and biodiesel are the ultimate green fuels.  However, there is no way to grow enough biofuel feedstock (typically from corn in the USA) for this fuel to displace petroleum to any great extent.  As crops are grown for fuel rather than food, this diversion of resources places upward pressure on the price of food.   Please refer to an interesting CBC article about agricultural prices  as well as the OECD report entitled "BIOFUELS: IS THE CURE WORSE THAN THE DISEASE?" found the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations web site:

The OECD has said biofuels may "offer a cure that is worse than the disease they are seeking to heal".

"The current push to expand the use of biofuels is creating unsustainable tension that will disrupt world markets without generating significant environmental benefits."

"When such impacts as soil acidification, fertilizer use, biodiversity loss and toxicity of agricultural pesticides are taken into account, the overall environmental impacts of ethanol and biodiesel can very easily exceed those of petrol and mineral diesel."

The holy grail of "green" fuels is hydrogen, an element that is also very scarce in its pure form on earth.  Green in the sense that it is produced from renewable sources, the most common being the electrolytic cracking of water.  Hydrogen may also be produced from "brown" sources such as the refining of petroleum.  Brown in the sense that byproducts of this production are greenhouse gases and other forms of pollution.  Almost all of the world's H2 is produced by steam reforming of natural gas, or as by-products of petroleum refining. Very little is currently produced by electrolysis although there is no technical reason that it can't be produced in large-scale wind farms in the US Midwest or even Patagonia.

Why would anyone consider using anhydrous ammonia rather than hydrogen?  Hydrogen, after all, contains more LHV (lower heating value) energy than ammonia (51,500 BTU/lb vs 7,987 BTU/lb or 119.93 kJ/g vs 18.577 kJ/g) on a weight basis.  However, on a volume basis ammonia is a much better hydrogen carrier than even liquefied hydrogen.  The energy density of liquefied hydrogen is 8,491 kJ/litre compared to ammonia's 11,308 kJ/litre.   Although ammonia contains 17.65% of hydrogen by weight, the fact that there are 3 hydrogen atoms attached to a single nitrogen atom allows ammonia to contain about 48% more hydrogen by volume than even liquefied hydrogen.  That is to say, a cubic meter of liquid hydrogen contains 71 kg of hydrogen compared with 105 kg for liquid anhydrous ammonia.

Hydrogen's physical properties make it very difficult to handle.  Because it is such a low density gas, very high pressures must be used to transport compressed hydrogen gas and this results in very low energy densities:

48,900 Btu/ft3 gas @ 3,000 psig & 60 ?F
121,000 Btu/ft3 gas @ 10,000 psig & 60 ?F
in metric, this is:

1,825 kJ/litre gas @ 200 barg & 15 ?C
4,500 kJ/litre gas @ 690 barg & 15 ?C
The low energy density of compressed hydrogen gas makes storage and transport very expensive.  Transporting compressed hydrogen gas any significant distance by truck can consume more energy in diesel fuel than what is contained in hydrogen.  Liquefied hydrogen is obviously more energy dense than compressed hydrogen gas but a significant amount of energy must be expended to liquefy hydrogen and keep it refrigerated because its boiling point is ?423 ?F (?253 ?C).  Liquefaction requires about 30% of the energy content of liquid hydrogen while compression to 800 bar requires about 10-15% of energy carried by the hydrogen.

Hydrogen's molecules are very small and difficult to contain.  Hydrogen will slowly leak out from hoses and its rate of leakage is much higher than larger molecule gases like ammonia and propane.  Hydrogen also causes embrittlement in metals which requires periodic replacement of metallic tubing, valves, and tanks.

Hydrogen is typically transported as a compressed gas and a 40 ton truck that can carry 26 tons of gasoline can only carry about 400 kg (0.4 tonnes) of compressed hydrogen due to the weight of the high pressure hydrogen tanks.

Ammonia, in comparison, stores and handles very much like LPG.  Its boiling point is -33.35 ?C (-28.03 ?F).  Propane, the main constituent of LPG, has a boiling point of -42.07 ?C (-43.73 ?F).  On a hot day, a tank of NH3 at 50?C (122?F) will have a pressure of 2032 kPa (295 psi) compared with propane at 1729 kPa (251 psi) so it is important to keep these fuels out of the sun.

The design pressure of both anhydrous ammonia and propane tanks (with a corrosion allowance) is 250 psi which corresponds to a temperature of 44?C (111?F) for ammonia and 47?C (116?F) for propane.  If these tanks were designed to the 312 psi (propane tank without a corrosion allowance), that corresponds to a temperature of 57?C (135?F) for ammonia and 60?C (140?F) for propane.

As for fuel properties, let's compare some relevant fuels:

Property Ammonia Hydrogen Propane CNG / Methane Ethanol Gasoline Diesel
Energy Density LHV (BTU/gal) 40,571 30,459 @ -423?F 84,500 19,800 @ 2400 psi   116,090 ~129,050
Energy Density LHV (MJ/litre) 14.1 8.4   23.3 21.1 29.8 35.8
Minimum Ignition Energy (mJ) 680 0.011 - 0.017   0.28 - 0.3 n/a 0.8 n/a
Octane Number 130+ 130+ 104 105 -  122   87 - 93 N/A
Auto Ignition Temperature (?C) 630 500   580 363 246 - 280 210
Flash Point (?C) 11 -253   -188 13 - 17 <-40 >62
Latent heat of vaporization (BTU/gal) 3356 N/A 775 N/A   ~900 ~710
Boiling Point (?C) -33 -253   -162 78 126 287
Critical Temparature (?C) 132 -240   -83 -- -- --

Using anhydrous ammonia as an engine fuel is not a blue-sky concept.  There are already three companies in the business of building NH3-fueled engines or NH3 engine conversions: Hydrogen Engine Center, Hydrofuel Inc., and NH3CAR.

For more information, please visit the following links:

http://www.nhthree.com/ (Coming soon!)

Ammonia Fuel Network

Iowa Energy Center's Biomass Energy CONversion facility (BECON) Ammonia Site

Raso Enterprises' Ammonia Fuel Forum

Potential Roles of Ammonia in a Hydrogen Economy

The Ammonia Economy

Ammonia: Key to US Energy Independence

AIR LIQUIDE's Gas Encyclopaedia - Ammonia

R.M. Technologies Technical Information
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 15, 2010, 16:07:09 pm
Interesting, however, Stan only ionizes things for the Hydrogen Fracturing Process, so if you are thinking it's actually ammonia fuel coming out out the Hydrogen Fracturing Process then you have to ignore the results he was getting, 44,000 - 108,000 barrels of oil worth of energy per gallon of water, with his actual device in 87-88, and then he talks about 2,500,000 barrels of oil worth of energy per gallon of water, maximum yield.

Not to mention the temperatures he is getting of over 20,000 degrees... that doesn't happen with ammonia, I'm sure.

If you want to test this theory, you are going to have to build a Hydrogen Gas Gun and then run some tests on the chemical composition coming out. :)
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 15, 2010, 17:17:28 pm
Interesting stuff Steve
As always its all about the Joules per Liter; not per Kilogram.

The question is:
How do you get your 3 H's to hook up with 1 N?
How do you figure Stan used to produce and use NH3?
 :)
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 15, 2010, 17:49:25 pm
The theory behind all this is that hydrogen that is released by help of the electrolysis proces is capable of bonding with other atoms.
 
Nitrogen atoms have five electrons in their outer ring, but they have room for eight electrons there.
Because that nitrogen atom is an electron negative atom and the hydrogen is a positive atom, they can bond.
you will get NH3 = ammonia......yes sir.

So, now you have 2 atoms. One who is big and can use extra electrons and who is chasing towards those extra electrons and one small hydrogen atom with his own little electron.
Guess who wins the battle?

Stan explained this proces very precise in his video.
The nitrogen atom acts the same as an oxygen atom. Both want extra electrons.
That poor little Hydrogen atom........Some of it will go towards the oxygen atom and become water and some will become ammonia or even something else...

You are right. We dont know what kind of gass we will have, if we dont test the gas in a lab.

All we can do is make an ionizer for air and see if the engine reacts of the ionized air. If it does, then its time to go to a lab for some tests.

Steve








Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 16, 2010, 15:31:40 pm
Stan had his gasses tested after they were, made at a lab,and it came out two parts hydrogen to one part oxygen.It's in the videos and the evaluation report to.
No mention of ammonia.
Don
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 16, 2010, 18:34:28 pm
Stan had his gasses tested after they were, made at a lab,and it came out two parts hydrogen to one part oxygen.It's in the videos and the evaluation report to.
No mention of ammonia.
Don

Just because Stan doesn't discuss ammonia - the ace in his sleeve, that doesn't mean it isn't there.

Anyone can use their nose to verify ammonia creation - it doesn't take very much.

Davy 1807 - "nitrogen will bind to electrolytic hydrogen in the presence of water" when it normally
won't bind to other hydrogen.

Search Storch & Olson, etc... it is all spelled out in no uncertain terms.

I think it assumes a lot that Stan's patents, etc.... can be taken word for word. He obviously
wants to protect his intellectual property. Also, if you go on anything based on everything he
says in his own documents, you get the corresponding results - hence, lack of water powered
dune buggy replications anywhere.

All the people that are getting results - real thermal release just just fast quick hho popping,
are creating ammonia point of use.

Study Langmuir.

And release energy potential from ammonia? Use real plasma ignition and not regular spark.
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 16, 2010, 19:35:19 pm
I dont understand Steve;  The whole point of producing amonia would be to get it into a compact form that can be stored in a 'fuel' tank.
Its a damn good idea if you use solar, wind or hydroelectric power to produce H and then NH3 which is easily handled in the same fashion as petrol.

I see no point in producing amonia on-board except for the fact that H takes up a lot of room in the combustion chamber which decreases power, relative to a petrol powered engine??
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2010, 01:27:56 am
I see no point in producing amonia on-board except for the fact that H takes up a lot of room in the combustion chamber which decreases power, relative to a petrol powered engine??

Atomic hydrogen has 3 times the power of H2. You cannot contain atomic hydrogen that is introduced
into the engine, you will lose it past the rings, etc... You need a bigger molecule that will carry hydrogen
into the engine and THEN have atomic hydrogen freed AFTER compression and when the plasma
ignition hits.

If you try to produce atomic hydrogen from the WFC, which you will not succeed - it simply combines
back to HOH or HHO. So creating a lot of water gas in hopes of providing a lot of hydrogen in HOH,
HHO or even atomic hydrogen isn't even the point of the WFC. (0.3 liters per minute is the cell setup
that Stan recommends "small scale" according to the referenced page). Most others with WORKING
knowledge of water fuel are making 3-6 liters per minute so more than Stan recommends but
A LOT LESS than is really needed to run an entire engine on HHO because running the engine on
HHO is not what Stan Meyer was doing. Every cell he ever showed running in any video never showed
enough HHO production to run an entire car engine on just HHO.

Small 600cc engines can work with just HHO to run it but then hook it to
a generator and make enough electricity from that to make its own HHO. It won't work because
you're only getting a fraction of the power from hydrogen by burning it HHO form.

HHO (small amounts) is only a catalyst that
when the plasma hits, there is dissociation of diatomic hydrogen into atomic hydrogen. This small
amount of hydrogen that is sourced from HHO or HOH is burned and nh3 in presence of atomic
hydrogen and atomic oxygen is extremely combustible. The ammonia is your main source of hydrogen.
Remember there is heat and pressure at this point.

The exhaust is a tiny amount of h2o and a lot of nitrogen. There can be traces of nitrogen oxide type
compounds that can be recycled.

Between those that have success, they each have their own specific viewpoints on the sequence
of steps in the reactions. However, there is no debate about the fact about ammonia.
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2010, 01:52:53 am
Every paragraph you wrote either says something wrong or irrelevant. Which is fine, if you are trying to learn, but since you think you have it figured out, all I can do is wish you luck.

:)
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2010, 03:06:35 am
again that's 0.3 litres of water converted per minute, not hho!!
Get your numbers right and try again!!!!
Don
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2010, 05:04:19 am
If you think you see 480 liters per minute of HHO being produced by Stans wfc, show it :) It
is irrelevant and unnecessary. Stan talked about THERMAL EXPLOSIVE ENERGY and that has nothing to
do with a lot of HHO and is apparent nobody here knows what thermal explosive energy means
or what it is in reference to! Those gas production claims are bogus as is most of his explanations
on what his process is.

What is wrong with everyone that they think Stan Meyer even told the truth about
his whole process? You go with those explanations and you get the corresponding results, which is
nothing like what he described.

Again, results speak for themselves and there are already people (that is plural)with results and
ALL of them are using small amounts of HHO  as a matter of FACT - learn your chemistry people,
I gave you references of what to search for.

I am not wrong in what I have said and in time you will see that you are only interested in
maintaining what you already think you know instead of learning something that actually works.

You all have the answers so you don't need anything from anyone else. Your results (lack of)
speak for themselves. Good luck on your big hho production!

I can see why you guys haven't succeeded.
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2010, 05:58:58 am
:)
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2010, 06:46:51 am
I'm going to side with Mr Qiman he is spelling out the latest information.
Its not an easy process but if you did the research it will definately have plenty of chemistry there.

Qiman is not the process of water air and recirculated exhaust what creates the ammonia if all parts were broken down and reshuffled by an ionization process of these parts or molecules (nitrogen hydrogen) but what doesn't make sense is there is oxygen in there too.
78% nitro 20% oxy 2% trace from air itself that the GP processes and if ammonia is NH3 it may not be completely ammonia but some other form or unknown or unwritten as of yet, I say this because what happened to the O O2 O3 O5 in this process.
This whole activity is happening in the cylinder also, and is not what comes out the exhaust, since the exhaust is a byproduct of what happened in the motor after it fired, so thats maybe why no ammonia would be measured out the exhaust?.

Also you have been real hard at this for years on top of that.

What I think Donaldwfc and DynoDon are very concerned with or focused on at this time is refining the process of creating the HHO in huge quantities in a resonant condition with very low current to boot.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this as I also truly believe the process of electrolyzing HHO can be taken to an extreme and would not be called electrolysis anymore but another method and can create a beneficial fuel result for us all.

The chemical process and combo's of all those molecules and research of the many deep minded and routed peoples of the many forums in my book are hitting the nail on the head with the GP, injection processing, plasma sparks and manipulations of the neccessary molecular structure to other than fire the cylinder and have no leakage of blowby, create a great exhaust mixture to go back into the air.
Its just around the corner but will any of them release the information for us others or will they stand to fill their deep pockets with the gread that surrounds all man kind, power and money and all those NDA's that keep them bound up and silent. And then the information becomes buried again.
Who will lead us to Freedom maybe H20power?
There is a lot of information still missing for that project to be completed.

So whats the point of laying a low blow and anyone being hard headed its all good here!

I can see at this site we need more activity, more builds  would help a whole bunch, researchers actually building something and exposing it here would be real nice.
But have a feeling there is some hidden activity here a brewing and festering.
People with good ideas.

Maybe Dynodon could dig a little deeper in those real Meyer notes and get some good clues.
And what happened to Geotex and to J Bostick.
Have a feeling your holding back there Dyno!   
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2010, 11:11:20 am
Its good to read all those different point of views here.. ;) ;) ;)
Lets keep respect for eachother, ok?

I can understand both points of view, but i am going with the Ammonia or what kind of gas mix is going into the engine.

Komtek is having a good point. We will not know what the final mix is.
Its a mix of N, O, H. Lots of oxygen and nitrogen that will bond with hydrogen in some way or form.

Add nitrogen as fuel part and your totall volume of fuel will increase hughly....
Add the slower burnrate part and you will find yourself a system that is capable of creating enough energy to drive your car and to make his own fuel.. ;) :D

Steve









Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 17, 2010, 15:36:11 pm
Of course,I'm holding back alot of info,only because it would be counter productive for the owner.I'm not going to cause him harm in what he's trying to do.But at the same time ,I don't have the answers either.There's alot to go through there and I or the owner haven't even scratched the surface,That's what we're trying to do now.But I don't have the money to go down there and spend weeks at a time to do it.Plus I have to go back to work monday,so it will be difficult after that.I've been off for three months.Completly broke at this time.
Don
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 18, 2010, 17:22:53 pm
Hello..
As final reaction Meyer ask that obtain THERMAL EXPLOSIVE ENERGY.. I interpeter that in other way ...THERMAL+EXPLOSIVE=ENERGY
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 18, 2010, 18:09:19 pm
Hello..
As final reaction Meyer ask that obtain THERMAL EXPLOSIVE ENERGY.. I interpeter that in other way ...THERMAL+EXPLOSIVE=ENERGY

Hi and welcome Tutanka,

Thats also a way of explaing Stan Meyer... ;)

Steve
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 18, 2010, 20:45:34 pm
Meyer think simple and is because anything have understand the principle. Peoples think more difficult, do not think with your mind and is more simple copy that create.. For that in the world are presents 98% of customers and 2% of creators..
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 18, 2010, 21:32:59 pm
Meyer think simple and is because anything have understand the principle. Peoples think more difficult, do not think with your mind and is more simple copy that create.. For that in the world are presents 98% of customers and 2% of creators..

Tutanka,

Can you tell us a bit about your ionizing system?
Like, what kind of electrodes and how much volt you are using?

regards
Steve
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 18, 2010, 22:13:38 pm
Steve,
As you know I can't ask clear.. As written on EF forum I have found right chemical formula used from Meyer.. using air and water only. I'm working on prototype using an car and apply modifications on that. I need max 3 months for obtain complete working prototype. You can or not believe in me.. for  me important don't are moneys but only have reached the illumination.  Regards
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 18, 2010, 22:50:47 pm
Steve,
As you know I can't ask clear.. As written on EF forum I have found right chemical formula used from Meyer.. using air and water only. I'm working on prototype using an car and apply modifications on that. I need max 3 months for obtain complete working prototype. You can or not believe in me.. for  me important don't are moneys but only have reached the illumination.  Regards

Ok, Tutanka.
Well, keep us updated on your developments as much as you like to share.
You will have many ears here who want to listen to you....
If you need help, just let me know.

Steve
Title: Sunlight slows down reaction H and O and info on Ammonia
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 18, 2010, 22:57:38 pm
Here is a doc about what sunlight is doing towards H and O.
It also explains a lot about ammonia.

Its a very nice doc to read!!!!!


Steve
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 19, 2010, 11:27:43 am
Yes.. is an good book but is old dated 1919..
Title: Re: Sunlight slows down reaction H and O and info on Ammonia
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 19, 2010, 15:44:31 pm
Here is a doc about what sunlight is doing towards H and O.
It also explains a lot about ammonia.

Its a very nice doc to read!!!!!


Steve

HI Steve,
Can you explain me about your help?? :)
Title: Re: Sunlight slows down reaction H and O and info on Ammonia
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 19, 2010, 22:16:45 pm
Here is a doc about what sunlight is doing towards H and O.
It also explains a lot about ammonia.

Its a very nice doc to read!!!!!


Steve

HI Steve,
Can you explain me about your help?? :)

What do you need?
If you like, you can send me a PM.

Steve
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 21, 2010, 10:07:17 am
Hello Steve,
Sorry for delay of reply bt I'm working hard on water system, from no more days you can see with your eyes... as written in EF Meyer or government  have written wrong nformation inside patents for preserve that "SIMPLE" technology.. My italian friend have see functional water cars from italian government but they ask .. no ready for use now maybe from 20years.. My friend collaborate with me to that project but after see that have stopped all.. I don't know really why.. but explaination is I have lost 2 years and is all ready . Personally I think that governement have old water ca that don't run completely to water or maybe my friend have see meyer car  ;) . In all cases I have continued to working on that project and I have found solution, true solution not dream. And can be ready NOW!! We can't continue to live in an world consumed from wars and pollution. Green energy is need now not from 20 years. For that I have decided to modify an car, transform that to water gas  and present the video  to the world .. Thanks for read me...
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 21, 2010, 23:40:47 pm
Hello Steve,
Sorry for delay of reply bt I'm working hard on water system, from no more days you can see with your eyes... as written in EF Meyer or government  have written wrong nformation inside patents for preserve that "SIMPLE" technology.. My italian friend have see functional water cars from italian government but they ask .. no ready for use now maybe from 20years.. My friend collaborate with me to that project but after see that have stopped all.. I don't know really why.. but explaination is I have lost 2 years and is all ready . Personally I think that governement have old water ca that don't run completely to water or maybe my friend have see meyer car  ;) . In all cases I have continued to working on that project and I have found solution, true solution not dream. And can be ready NOW!! We can't continue to live in an world consumed from wars and pollution. Green energy is need now not from 20 years. For that I have decided to modify an car, transform that to water gas  and present the video  to the world .. Thanks for read me...

Hi Tutanka,

Its nice to see other people sharing the same passion as I have.... :D   
And you are right about trying to make the world a better place.
I wish that the world leaders would thought the same.....
Keep up the good work and at the end, i am sure that we will succeed!

Steve
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 21, 2010, 23:57:54 pm
greeti n gs fr  o m hot place     
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 22, 2010, 00:01:03 am
greeti n gs fr  o m hot place     

Your in Brasil now?

If so, then i am jelious.... ;)


Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on August 12, 2010, 16:13:57 pm
So guy's, why have this tread been so quiet??
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on March 09, 2012, 22:55:19 pm
Steve and Group.
    If you want to use industrial / 10% ammonia, please add 1200 mg. of Ibuprofen to the mix. Don't forget to mix it with some distilled water first and then filter it to get rid of some of the leftover buffer.   Could a chemistry inclined person in the group please explain the additions to the ammonia for me. It can be better said.   Thanks - Handy Dan
Title: Re: Stan used ammonia?
Post by: Login to see usernames on March 10, 2012, 17:24:41 pm
Steve and Group.
    If you want to use industrial / 10% ammonia, please add 1200 mg. of Ibuprofen to the mix. Don't forget to mix it with some distilled water first and then filter it to get rid of some of the leftover buffer.   Could a chemistry inclined person in the group please explain the additions to the ammonia for me. It can be better said.   Thanks - Handy Dan

Well, I for one do not understand the chemistry you present, but most engines are ready for 100% ammonia - Some mix with a few percent gasoline to lubricate the valves and pistons, but that can be modified to ammonia. What one must consider is that ammonia as well as pure hydrogen is a dry fuel, so no lubrication there.