Not electrolysis or fuel cell.Nano technology whereby  water is subject to high pressure then spray to produce microscopic droplet(similiar to bubble jet technology),thus under ideal condition water is spit into hydrogen and oxygen.This combustible mixture is then use for heat enegy production.This enegy from water hold huge potential for clean,cheap.renewabl eource or enegy supply
205746
How exactly are you splitting the H from the O?   Under high pressure and spraying?  I don't see how that could possibly work.  Cold fusion also has a huge potential for cheap, clean, renewable energy.  But much like what you are talking about, it simply isn't possible with the current technology.  If splitting H and O was so cheap and simple it would be done all of the time.  Electrolysis works, but the energy input makes it unrealistic for creating liquid hydrogen as an energy source.  If you truely have a way to spit the H20 molecule cheaply and efficiently you'd already be a multi-billionaire.
607957
The cheapest source of course is water, but getting hydrogen from water is expensive. Other sources of hydrogen induce\nsodium borohydride NaBH4, in which then added to water is will give out hydrogen gas.
47550
Assuming you mean photoelectric and not just solar heat cells: \nThe material (silicon ore = sand) is not the problem, the trouble is the apparatus needed to electrolyse and purify the material, and then apply it to suitable carriers.
421632
"Regular" air will react with hydrogen gas to produce water, as air is about 20% oxygen. Yes, the reaction produces a lot of energy - as in it produces an explosion. So yes, it is very dangerous in large amounts. \n\nYou can produce hydrogen by reaciting a metal such as zinc or magnesium with hydrochloric acid.
123831
I did an AICHE project on this a year ago.  We set up a model using a tower and extracted CO2 from the atmosphere using NaOH.  CO2 + NaOH yields sodium bicarbonate.  It's very expensive to do, however, because the regeneration process of NaOH required a lot of energy.  Also, we ran into problems with air circulation.  Obviously the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is very small in comparison to nitrogen and oxygen, so in order to sequester enough CO2 to make a difference in the atmosphere, you have to be moving air at phenomenal velocities, which requires a lot of energy.  Burning fuel to produce this energy is kind of an oxymoron because you'd be adding to the problem of CO2; therefore, we used solar energy in our model.  We then said we'd store the CO2 in empty oil storages.
40873
Just how much Hydrogen do you want to produce?\nI could tell you several ways to make small amounts for next to no cost, but if you want to step up production, it will involve increase the price too.\n\nElectrolysis of water is probably the cheapest method, especially when the energy your using is cheap/free too.  The cheaper the energy, the cheaper the over all price.  The energy from a battery is much more expensive than the energy "out of the wall" which is much more expensive than energy from the sun (free).\n\nYou could also produce Hydrogen by reacting a more active metal in an acid.  Metals like Iron, Zinc, Magnesium, (you could use the Alkili metals, but I woulnt advise it), ...\nCopper (in a penny) wouldnt work since it is less active than Hydrogen, but the zinc inside the penny would. [we ignore the cost of the penny you have to destroy]
287651
Look at the acronym he uses -- hho.  What's another way to write that -- perhaps H2O -- which is water!\n\nThere have been many scams purporting to generate power by injecting water into a fuel supply, or a carburator, etc.  But they are SCAMS.  \n\nThe laws of thermodynamics make it impossible to get more energy out of a system than you put into it -- so you'd require more energy to electrolyze the water into hydrogen and oxygen than you could ever possibly get back by the recombination reaction, even in a perfectly designed system.
60516
http://www.howstuffworks.com/fuel-cell.htm\n\nhttp://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid537.php\n\nhttp://www.wisconsinpublicservice.com/news/cells/work.asp\n\nhttp://americanhistory.si.edu/fuelcells/basics.htm
412162
Absolutely.  In fact, there have been several different approaches, including zapping little pellets with a monster laser (NOVA), which are then immersed in water.  These minuscule nuclear bombs fuse and release their energy into the water, creating steam and turning turbines.\n\nThe most promising method, however, is a fusion reactor; a magnetic bottle which traps plasma.  Fusion occurs when the electromagnetic forces of nuclei (which are positive) are overcome.  In order to get nuclei, atoms are injected into the reactor and brought to immense temperatures.  The individual atoms, which are neutral, become so energetic that the electrons are stripped from the nuclei, creating plasma.  Plasma is simply free electrons (negatively charged and unbounded to a nucleus) and the positively charged nuclei.  Because these are positively and negatively charged, the plasma is contained within magnetic field lines.  This is the proverbial "magnetic bottle".\n\nThe nuclei smash into each other, creating helium nuclei and excess neutrons.  These neutrons are EXTREMELY energetic (14 MeV), and are neutrally charged.  Therefore, these neutrons zip right past the magnetic field lines.  The charged plasma remains, continuing the fusion process; and the neutrons are captured in water, where elastic collisions with H2O molecules transfers the energy from the neutrons to the water, heating the water, turning it to steam, and turning the turbines.\n\nThere are a couple of major problems.  First, the sun is very big and very hot.  Getting similar temperatures and pressures on Earth is next to impossible.  Although the energy released is several orders of magnitude greater than the energy put in when the process is going a full capacity, getting it started has been very difficult.  However, through TFTR and the new ITER, already the plasmas have generated more energy than were used to start the process.  This is a big step.\n\nAlso, the magnetic bottle and the plasma can experience some strange instabilities and wave functions.  Any time a harmonic resonance-like phenomena occurs, the fusion can break down, the plasma cools, and the process slows or stops.  As the test reactors continue to gather data, these phenomena are better understood.\n\nFinally, those 14 MeV neutron zip through the magnetic bottle and the water, and interact with impurities in the concrete and building materials, creating radioactive waste.  This waste is not insignificant - huge amounts of concrete becomes low-level waste.  Low level waste is NOT a measure of how dangerous it is - this stuff can be very dangerous - but it will only remain dangerous for about 100 years or so.  It's not the stuff that remains deadly for thousands of years.\n\nSo solve the instabilities, be able to sustain a plasma and reaction long enough to become self-sustaining, and be prepared for the low level waste, and fusion will become an almost unlimited energy supply.
23941
Yes you could. Free hydrogen (H2) is rare in the atmosphere though, so you would have to buy industrially obtained hydrogen (which mostly comes from natural gas) which is expensive so its always cheaper to drill a water well or something. But yes, if you want to combine oxygen and hydrogen, and light it with a match, you will get water. Good luck trying to contain it after it goes from gas to the combustion product of hydrogen and oxygen, which will be water vapor (steam).
145605
Depends on what you mean by "new". There are lots of new sources in development, but nothing that is practical or economical yet. Hydrogen fuel cells are clean, efficient and non-polluting. But they are still very expensive and you still need a source of elemental hydrogen to make them work. \n\nOur best bet is hydrogen fusion - thais is what powers the sun. But we are still decades away from a successful commercial power plant. Until then, we are dependant on oil and natural gas.
332249
I think you are talking about Roger Billings. http://www.roger.billings.name/\n\nIt seems that he is using hydrogen fuel cells to try to provide power to cars. Hydrogen fuel cells need hydrogen and oxygen to operate.  Billings is working on electrolyzing water to generate hydrogen and oxygen.  Electrolyzing means he applies a large voltage to the water in order to split up the hydrogen and oxygen that naturally form water (H2O).  \n\nI don't know about the involvement of the government or the military.  I think cars that run on hydrogen fuel cells today have to carry a tank of hydrogen in the car, which can be very dangerous.
429271
Water is just a liquid gas isn't it? Hydrogen and Oxygen mixed makes water. That's how.
107177
The original was just electrochemical extraction.  THe current Haber process (called HGP - do a google search) has promise.
37672
Some tips...\n--Use a strong electrolyte (substances that will break up into ions [almost] completely in solution), the higher the concentration, the better.  Also you need to be careful on which electrolyte you choose.\n--Try not to use an over volttage (a voltage over the minimum necesary to electrolisize the water.  Insread, try to use a very high current, higher current = more production of gasses.  To increase current without increasing voltage, reduce resistance.\n--Place the electrodes close together to reduce internal resistance in the cell.\n\nEven by doing these things, you cannot hope to get much better than about 50% efficency doing water electrolysis, maybe 65% if you are good.\n\nThere are yahoo groups out there devoted to just such a tast as Hydrogen production through water electrolysis (I have one infact), they can also give advice based on experience.
26582
I know that one thing they're using them for is car engines, although that's still in it's early phase.  Please to note, though, you left out the fact that extracting hydrogen from it's chemical friends is, as of yet, not energy efficient.  This is the main downfall of hydrogen fuel cells.  Currently, though, photoenzymes are being developed to solve this problem.  Until then, though, fuel cells are not a good alternative energy source.
66027
The idea is to add the acid to the water and then pass a current through the water.  The water will split into Hydrogen and Oxygen.  The bubbles of these gasses can collected in tubes, the H will produce twice as much gas as the O.\n\nThe rocket can be powered by igniting the hydrogen.\n\nI think the citric acid is more reactive than absorbic acid, but any thing will do including vinegar (acetic acid).