There's an ad at the start of the video, sorry.

Found this just now on GLP of all places.

http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=84561

Snake oil?

Sounds too good to be true.

They don't say how the hydrogen is extracted from the water.


(A google found this: http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Dir...d#How_it_Works where they say it's a chemical reaction, but doesn't use a catalyst, which doesn't lower my disbelief.)

__________________
Measure once. Cut twice. Power tools are fun.

Too good to be true. If the car runs on water, it has an external source of energy.

Period.

I just chided a woo-woo friend over this very thing.

Oh, and if it's truly a water engine, why hasn't Big Oil killed everyone to keep them quiet?

__________________
Olsen the moderator.

Here's the text from the linked page with the video...
Googling the company name produces a lot of hits reporting the same story

This article adds this bit of information:
I have no belief that these guys just overthrew 200 years of chemistry and physics. It sounds like there is a metal in the membrane that reacts with the water, producing hydrogen. Of course, once the membrane is all reacted, that's the end of your hydrogen. This is not a water powered car.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

I think what I found interesting was that it was breathlessly reported by Reuters, seemingly without criticism or at least second opinion.



(P.S. (After Delvo's post) Yes, maybe a bad choice of word [hyperbole on my part], but I stand by my assesment.)

__________________
Measure once. Cut twice. Power tools are fun.

They all seemed like they were breathing just fine to me.

That can be fixed. And should be. Lazy and credulous reporters are one of the forces chipping away at the foundations of society.

Despite the usual sniping about the press, this seems like a very encouraging development.

Btw, at the risk of getting banned, if the free press ever goes away as some here would apparently like, so does our democracy. Be careful what you ask for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genepax

Wikipedia entry sums it up quite nicely.

I, for one, would never advocate the abolishing of the free press. I just wish that much of the press would do a little better job in reporting science.

As far as the car, do you have some information that would make you encouraged by this report? To me, it sounds like nonsense.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

Perhaps I should have said mildly encouraging. I certainly agree the report is incomplete; so, lacking complete data, I am reluctant to call it nonsense (or anything) at this point and remain mildly encouraged. I imagine at some point, some bright spark will figure out an economical way of separating hydrogen from H2O; whether this is that spark, I have no way of knowing right now.

Who has suggested that the free press should go away?
They could maybe report things more accurately or make some effort to investigate some of the claims they report.

__________________
'The eye can only see what the mind is prepared to accept'

My bad for bringing it up...but just to complete the thought...there is growing tendency in the US to blame the press for pretty much everything. I find that to be one of the scariest developments in our culture in the last 30 years.

As far as this topic, until further data come in, I find it easier to believe a Japanese company would withhold important details about their system rather than fabricate the entire thing. When the data are all in, we'll know for sure, of course. I'd like to think we are on the verge of a new industrial revolution...but that may just be wishful thinking.

I'll disagree with the first; I think people have been blaming the messengers since messengers were invented. But it is still the obligation of the messenger to get the message right.

As for the second... is there something special about Japanese companies, particularly this one? I find it easier to believe that they have not broken the laws of thermodynamics and are "distorting" the truth. Unless the detail they are withholding is that there is some fuel (such as a metal) in addition to the water.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

That's why I said I was more inclined to think they were withholding specifics...I certainly don't think they have repealed the laws of thermodynamics.

As for thinking it is more likely they are withholding data rather than outright lying, well, that has been my personal experience with Japanese business people. Perhaps yours has been different; I wouldn't know. In any case, as I said, it's just my opinion.

But, again, as far as this specific company and specific claim...I await more details before forming an opinion about the validity of what they are saying. Perhaps you have data that I don't have.

I saw this on TV last night, my first thought was "yeah wright". The wiki link is a nice summation of what might be happening here.
You need energy to "break" water into Hydrogen and Oxygen, currently most people are suggestion, Nuclear or Hydro or Wind, on a mass scale.

__________________
This whole internet thing is probably not a passing fad.-Ronald Brak
While speech might be free, consequences cost.-Doodler

Or even Solar Biological, that is my personal favorite at this time.
But yes, either the company is lying in some way, or the laws of physics are in for a major overhaul. Call me a doubter, but I find the latter rather more unlikely

__________________

Why is it always a CAR that "runs on water"? Why doesn't anyone ever claim to have an industrial process that gets megawatts of energy out of water?

My guess is that people likely to fall for that sort of thing are more interested in cars.

__________________
Fiction has to be plausible. Reality is under no such constraint.

Well, there are actually industrial processes that produce megawatts of electric power out of water, but most of them aren't portable and won't fit in cars.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

Just another:
IT RUNS ON JUST X (although you need Y to do it)

I don't think we will really get too far past this for a claim of a car that runs on water.

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

The test will be:
How many they sell.
How much replacement membranes cost.
How much less than a normal car it costs to run.