# Browns gas plausibility for reducing gas cost?

So I am wondering if it is possible to boost the mileage of a car by using browns gas injected into the fuel input. From my understanding most cars can only harness about 20% of the total energy inside the gasoline. So if it has a better combustion wouldn't it get better mileage? Even if it only added 10 or 20% efficiency wouldn't that pan out to a reasonable amount of savings on gas? Here's a quote from another person stating that it doesn't work,

--- "Let's do some math on this. If this guy drives his truck for an hour at 60mph he is saying that before improvements he was burning about 6 gallons of gas at 125,000BTUs per gallon. That works our to a total of 750,000BTUs for his trip. Post HHO generator he was burning 3.3333 gallons to make the trip or the equivalent of 416662.5 BTUs. WOW that is great, it is a savings of roughly 333337.5 BTUs of gasoline. At the same time his generator is pumping out 6 liters of hydrogen per minute which yields 360 liters over the course of an hour. As there are 9.54 BTUs contained in a liter of hydrogen that means his generator is producing 3434.4 BTUs. Where are the other 3329903.1 BTUs coming from in this transaction. Unless he was driving down hill with a heavy load this does not work out by a longshot. Think about it."

but that's assuming that the gasoline is being 100% burned right? so if only 20% is burned and you increase efficiency by 20% then you've doubled your mileage right? So what I'm getting at, is there a way you can increase the burn rate of the gas that you're consuming? Can you just add oxygen to increase the burn or would it take more? I thought that was the entire point of the carburetor right? It mixes oxygen with the gas so its got a better burn rate correct? So is there any way to increase the efficiency? I really don't want a bunch of people saying, "this is bull, you are an idiot." I just want to check if the possibility is open and if so are there sources to prove that it does work and how I can go about researching the construction and installation of one. If it's impossible and you can prove it with facts then go for it and be polite about it. Thanks for your time!

Update:

Good answers. So basically you would need a more efficient engine to power the car rather than altering the process it's already undergoing? So this means you would want a car such as the honda FCX clarity or some alternate fuel source that would not loose so much efficiency to heat as the ICE right? (for those who havent heard of the clarity: http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/) As for improving efficiency, the best way would be to just make sure tires are at proper pressure, driving consistently for the least erratic fuel usage, ect?

Relevance
• 7 years ago

No, this is totally impossible. I agree with the other answer.

Your example is bogus. The whole HHO thing is so that the web sites can sell you (bogus) plans and make money.

It's very difficult to prove something is impossible. But auto manufacturers are not dummies. If it were this easy to get a major improvement in efficiency, they would have done it long ago. Remember, they are under hugh pressure from various governments to improve efficiency.

Bottom line, you have to burn gas to power the alternator, which produces the gas. This process is about 50% efficient. Now you propose to burn it in the engine, which is 30% at best. so you have an overall efficiency of 15%. For this to pay off, you need an efficiency over 100% which is not possible.

The problem with hydrogen powered cars is obtaining the hydrogen. Methods of producing hydrogen are expensive and involve a large amount of wasted energy, either natural gas, or electric power.

The net result, when you consider all those factors, is that a hydrogen vehicle uses more oil than a gas vehicle would.

• 7 years ago

That's not how the gas works. It doesn't increase the amount of gasoline being burned. Modern engines are a tradeoff of many things, so they are not as efficient as possible (which would be a thermodynamic efficiency of around 37%), but it is not the case that they are only burning 20% of the fuel. Virtually all of the fuel is burned inside the engine.

Instead the gas is a pure energy source. But since it has to be created by an inefficient alternator,you are losing energy in the entire process. The alternator is not free energy. The more electrical demand you make on it, the more of a load it places on the engine, which requires more fuel to drive.

Yes, you could design an engine to run with higher burn rates due to added oxygen, but this is only going to give a small efficiency increase, at a cost of added weight and complexity for the oxygen delivery system. It's unlikely that you could come out ahead. If this were easy to do, fleet maintainers would have done it for their fleets a long time ago.

• Alex
Lv 7
7 years ago

Nearly 100% of the gas is being burned. When you burn gas, it's creating heat and expanding the gases inside the cylinder. It isn't possible to convert all of this to mechanical energy. A lot is lost as waste heat when it heats up the cylinder walls instead of the gases. Most of the remaining efficiency losses are due to friction.

In practice, a little of the gas may not be burned simply due to the extremely short time (a few milliseconds) for the reaction to complete.

Carburetor? You need to update your knowledge a little. Modern cars use fuel injected engines with oxygen sensors to regulate the air-fuel ratio based on conditions. At higher RPMs it runs rich to have more power and run cooler. At lower RPMs it operates near the stoichiometric ratio to ensure complete burning.

You can make the engine run leaner (excess air) and it will get better fuel economy. But it will run hotter, damage your catalytic converter, and cause engine knocking - where it gets so hot the gas burns before the spark at the wrong point in the cycle.

Edit:

The benefit to fuel cells isn't really the efficiency. A fuel cell car is just an electric car that uses hydrogen as energy storage instead of a battery. Compared to an ICE, a fuel cell is fairly efficient (maybe 50%), but a Li-ion battery has an efficiency of 80-90%. But on both a volume and mass basis, compressed/liquid hydrogen has a much higher energy density than batteries, so you can store more energy in a smaller space. And it doesn't take 8 hours to fill up a liquid hydrogen tank like it does to recharge a big Li-ion battery.