Lowrie Peter Electrolyser

PETER LOWRIE electrolyzer: (page created at November 2007 Update)

## PETER LOWRIE, Electrolytic Gas, Draft, copyright 2005-2006, from ‘Lowrie Paper eGas.pdf’ available at http://my.opera.com/h2earth/blog/cybrarium

# Preambule: This paper sets out to describe why experimental apparatus, namely:
– Mitsubishi Cyclone (1)
– Honda TC 1600 (2)

engine(s) runs on electrolytic (3) gas. That is not strange in itself as it is well known that Hydrogen is a fuel*. The benefit of using Electrolytic Gas is that the Hydrogen has with it, its own oxidiser – Oxygen. Already perfectly proportioned, no gas mixing is required and so complete combustion is accomplished without the need for additional air. Here’s the rub; the car engine uses a separate belt driven three phase marine alternator in a ‘Y’ winding with output rated at 150 Amps at 24 Volts which is fed into three electrolysis cells, each cell gets a single phase. Beginning at 12 Volts the cells are heated partly by hot exhaust gas and partly by way of voltage on the plates within acting as heating elements, additional electrolyte haeting is provided with one 600 Watts mains rated elements within. When the cells get up to temperature (about 75 deg.C) the alternator tickle supply is reduced to a range between 1.24 to 3.00 Volts which then serves to increase electrolysis efficiency in accordance with Faraday’s Law(s) of electrolysis and thus efficiencies in the order of 97.5% (4) are achieved, the cell consuming circa 600 Amps each, the process becomes endothermic and provides gas (more than) sufficient to fuel the engine.

Thus engine generates its own fuel (and oxidiser) with ample power to spare. Most argue that this is an impossible situation; at best the engine becomes a dynamic brake and at worst it just won’t work. The explanation being that you can’t get more energy out than what you put in and in citing various texts, at first glance appears quite correct. The fact of the matter – as this paper will prove – is that the texts are either wwrong or fail to supply all of the information.

# Definitions: Various figures are provided in texts for the energy value of the Hydrogen bond stength (5) of 104 kcal/(1/mole) or 104 kcal/mole-1. So far as the mole fraction is concerned some express such as the inverse function and others as a reciprocal (mole-1) and (1/mole) respectively. In any case the purpose is to detail a part of the mole or indeed one molecule at a time over time. Following lectrolysis the demised atoms may be at their lowest, or induced to increased energy their electrons orbiting above the lowest energy state. In order to reveal the correct figures for all sides of the reaction(s), there is wisdom in beginning with the elemental gases and their oxidisation reaction and finish with decomposition in order that the results comply with Thermodynamic law. For the remainder of the paper kcal will be converted to kjoule (kj) so that 104 kcal = 435 kj and unless specified otherwise molar quantities are 1/mole (mole-1), denoting singular molecules as opposed to Avogadro’s Number which denotes 6.02 x 1023 molecules. When this approach is taken the energy content latent in the oxidisation is realised, not so when the calculations start with water – something appears to get lost.

# Electrochemical – V – Physical reactions: There are two bonds on the water molecule – one for each Hydrogen atom (of course). Therefore for one molecule of H2O 870 kj will break apart the water molecule and the equivalent energy, it is said, will initiate the gas combimation. Gas and oxidiser atoms never being in isolation, there being billions of them in n volume they undergo a chain reaction until all available atoms are recombined releasing enormous energy in quick time. The plasma speed is 3.9 Km/sec. The ash is water. Few texts referenced to date accounts for the energy release during recombination, more information about this apparent dichotomy will be discussed.

The heat flame (plasma) total energy is calculated by multiplying the respective atoms’ ionisation energies for the process. The ionisation energies (6) of H= 1312.06 kj and O= 1313.95 kjie1, (3388.33 kjie2, 5300.51 kjie3) upon combustion the (outer in Oxygen) electron orbits interact, merge and settle down to stable orbits:
Hie1 + Hie1 Oie1 = 3,447,962.47 kkj (e1)

Where ie is Ionisation Energy and n the energy layer (three in Oxygen) and only one in Hydrogen.

In the discussion of thermodynamics relating to the subject matter the question of heat is a very important one, there being two types of heat. On the one hand is heat due to molecular motion and on the other is the heat of photons coming and going during reactions.

(MDG nov07: inthe following part, symbols are not readable on the original pdf file, so I can’t transcripte them here)

In order of energy strength … The formation of Hydrogen is a nuclear reaction there being two well known modes of its coming into existance; primordial Hydrogen and neutron decay. Neither of which are relevent to this discussion. Oxidisation (burning) of Hydrogen is a physical reaction of the middle energy order. And electrolytic decomposition is a[n] [electro]chemical reaction. The notion of co-efficience rests in Electrolysis, of the low energy order – a chemical reaction and Combustion – a physical reaction of the middle energy order being vasstly disproportionate. This can be shown to be the case; let ?= 870kj be the total energy consumed in splitting H2O and ? be the oxidisation expenditure in equation (e1) of [combustion] energy.
?/? = 3963.18 (e2)

This does not describe some ‘hidden’ energy, nor do special-pleading of over-unity claims have any relevance. The calculation reflects the starting position of the two gases. Even if the bond strength is subtracted from both sides”
(?-?)/?= 3962.18 (e3)

… it is apparent that the combustion product is highly energetic. So which is it? The chemical equation given:
H2O(1) + 435kj –> H + H + O(g) + 435kj –> H2O(1) (e4)

is clearly mistaken because, a/ only half the required energy is given and b/ there is a continuing addition of energy on both sides and appears not to factor-in any energy release. In any case equation (e6) plugs in the correct values to the formula provided in the text (footnote #2) and equation (e7) enlarges to include the enrgy release.
H2O(1) + 435kj –> HO + H + 435kj –> H + H + O(g) [+870kj –> H2O(1)] (e5)

On the one hand energy is expended to break the bonds and on the other hand energy must be expended to remake them and clearly this imbalanced situation leaves a lot to be desired. What actually happens is that 870kj/mole-1 is expended to begin the recombination process and 3962kj/mole-1 is liberated as a net gain. The reason for this is that the ionisation process in electrolysis is [electro]chemical, the initiating energy is [electro]chemical however the resuktant ionisation (combustion) process is physical.
H + H(g) + O(g) + 870kj –> (H2O(ion) – 3962kj –> H2O(1) (e6)

… and then multiply this reaction by the gas volume denoted by Avogadro’s number.

The author of this paper is not in isolation insofar as these apparently anomalous results are concerned, others have addressed the issue. (7) ‘The smallest amount of energy needed to electrolyse one mole of water is 65.3 Wh at 25 deg.C (77 degrees F.). When the Hydrogen and Oxygen are recombined into water during combustion 79.3 Wh of energy is released. 14 Wh more energy is released in burning Hydrogen and Oxygen than is required to split water. This excess must be absorbed from the surrounding media (environment) in the form of heat during electrolysis.’ […] ‘At 25 deg.C, for voltages of 1.23 to 1.47 Volts, the electrolysis reaction ABSORBS HEAT. At over 1.47 V at 25 deg.C, the reaction gives off heat.’

The electrolysis cell voltage, overvoltage may be 1.3V therefore 1.47V + 1.3V = 2.77V is the voltage supplied.

One mole of water weighs 18 grams.
1,000 grams = 1 Liter ; 1,000 grams/ 18 grams = 55.55 moles (a7)
Therefore 1 Liter H2O produces 55.55 moles of Hydrogen and 27.775 mo;es of Oxygen. 870kj H2O produces as above which is then equal to 48328.50kj per Liter H2O. Conversion to kWhr divide by 3600 (or x by 0.0002778) = 3.658 kWhr per Liter H2O.

1 mole of gas = 24.450 liters of gas at room temperature, ‘T’ and atmospheric pressure ‘P’.
55.55 x 24.450 = 1,358.3 liters of Hydrogen (and 679 liters of Oxygen from 1 Liter of H2O.

# Feynmann Descriptions: Studies made of highly energetic atomic and molecular interactions show that electrons can absorb or emit multiple photons raising or lowering energy levels far more than ordinary. (8)If the Light is intense enough, the light will actually rip off the electrons of the atoms it is interacting with. When this occurs, the ripped-off electron absorbs upwards of 45 – 50 photons all at once. This normally happens in two steps: First, the electron absorbs enough photons (thus gaining enough energy) to be excited into a high-lying Rydberg state. Next, the electron will absorb another number of photons and leave the atom with a certain amount of kinetic energy.

A useful method to display the different reactions involved in the processes of combination (Gases to oxide (combustion)), decomposition and molecularisation are Feynmann diagrams. In the following diagrams only the leptons contained in each atom are displayed.

Before there was ever water there was only gas. Three electrons are involved in the process of combination and at each juncture the combining electrons produce photons:

Two electrons are introduced to break the bonds but those electrons are ions and so do not add to the resulting atoms electron number. At the same time IR photons are being absorbed by the molecules increasing their energies and adjusting the bond lengths:

Following combustion in which the flame plasma may be described as an ionisation process photons are emitted. Due to the Pauli Exclusion principle the Oxygen electrons interact only in the outer layer, the inner layers being completely filled only the outermost layer may take part. However all of the layerings electrons may encounter in the Hydrogen atom are available and so following combustion the free electrons emit photons every time they encounter the nucleus and during spin-down until it reaches the innermost. At this point there is still a position free for another electron to fill and so very shortly after decomposition neighboring Hydrogen atoms combine into Hydrogen molecules, each electron thereof emitting an ultraviolet photon – that’s two photons. This arrangement is not very stable and so two low energy order ions may be introduced causing the Hydrogen molecule to bond with the Oxygen atom. Therefore many more photons are emitted during combustion than are accounted for on the primary side of the equation when the was no oxide, only Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms in a gas.

# Bond Lengths: The entire work contained at http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/index.html should be read in conjunction with this paper. The part detailing Bond Lengths is reproduced here:

Shown opposite are the main vibrations occurring in water. The movements are animated using the cursor. The dipole moments change in the direction of the movement of the Oxygen atoms as shown by the arrows (9):

The main stretching band in liquid water is shifted to a lower frequency (v3, 3490 cm-1 and v1, 3280 cm-1 [8]) and the bending frequency increased (v2, 1644 cm-1 [942])

What this means is that the energy required to break the bonds increases or decreases proportionately to the bond lengths which may be altered by such things as magnetic fields or heat.

# Gibbs Free Energy: Do the rules comprising Gibbs Free Energy reconcile with the energy shown in equations (1 – 6)? No. Provided there are energy co-efficients involved does GFE get turned on it’s head? The Wien effect does it to Ohms Law. Why not here as well? Some reactions are spontaineous because they are exothermic ?H0. The combustion of Electrolytic Gas is exothermic but the question of entropy is a moot point. Two disordered gases ignited combine to make water which is not an increasing entropy proposition, therefore in our calculation ?S H = Enthalpy ; S = Entropy ; Del.G = Del.H- Del.(TS) (e8)

THe usual standard-state free energy of this system ?G cannot be applied herein due to the rapidly changing temperatures involved in the reaction and the Enthalpy is:
?G = Hg+ Hg + Og(1S) = -318.402 kcal/mol = ?H = – 151.81 = ?S x 6000Deg. = ?H- -910,860 kcal/mol (e9)

Following combustion of the gases at 6000 Deg.C the resulting oxide cools until it reaches ambient temperature, the molecules return to their lowest energy and the amount of energy released persuant to GFE is close to the energy taken by the other route in earlier equations, in other words – a lot more than the Hydrogen bond strength.

Alas it is not that simple though. One cannot say that the “heat” of electrolysis is equivalent to this heat of combustion there being crossovers of photonic and molecular heat during the exchanges.

# Faraday’s Laws (10):

Total Oxygen-Hydrogen volume is Hydrogen volume + Oxygen volume: This corresponds to about 0.627 liters per hour per Amp or 1.595Ah/l per cell.

If for example you have 7 cells in series and put 11A through the electrolyzer, according to Faraday’s Law you would produce:
0.627//Ah *11A*7= +- 48.3 Liters per hour at STP conditions. (e13)

Note, however, that this applies only at a certain temperature (0 deg.C) and pressure (1 atm). The produced gas volume will scale with ratio of temperatures in Kelvins (higher temperature = higher volume) and inversely with the ratio of pressures (lower pressure = higher volume).

If at 0 Deg.C (273.15 Deg.K) the production rate is 0.627 l/Ah, then at 25 Deg.C: 273.15 Deg.K + 25 Deg.K = 298.15 K (e14)
The production rate is : 298.15 / 273.15 = +- 109% (e15)
larger or about 0.685 l / Ah. With 7 cells and 11A this would be 52.5 Liters per hour.

On the other hand is the output gas has a temperature of 40 Deg.C while it is being measured and the ambient pressure of 0.75 atm (about 1.5km elevation above sea level), the electrolyzer that produces 48.3 liters per hour at STP will produce:
313.15 Deg.K / 273.15 Deg,K * 1atm/0.75atm * 48.3l/hr = 73.8 l/hr (e16)

So even though the volume of the gas is larger at higher temperature and lower pressure, the energy contained in the gas or the energy required to electrolyze it is the same. If you produce the gas at 40C and 0.75ATM and bring it to 0C and 1ATM, the volume will reduce by about 35%. Thus it is very important to include the pressure and temperature in calculations.

What may not be immediately clear is that different experimenters report various results that are prima facae out of step with cherished laws. Some experimenters report efficiencies that appear in excess of Faraday’s Law yet others no matter how hard they try attain only low levels of efficiency. Are the over unity claims due to errors in method or calculation?
Probably!. But then one has to consider consistent variances shown by experimenters as detailed in the analysis of their results which ultimately culminates in the preponderance of combustion energy output many times more than expected.

# Thermodynamics of Electrolytic Gases (12):The heat of combustion values for monoatomic and diatomic (conventional) electrolytic oxyhydrogen gas are compared below.

When conventional diatomic (tank gases) oxygen (O2) and hydrogen (H2) are ignited, the bonds between the gas atoms in the diatomic gas molecules have to be broken first. This consumes energy. Energy is then released§ when the H and O atoms recombine into H2O. The total amount of energy released is the sum of these two energies, where the other one has ‘+’ sign and the other one ‘-‘ sign.

While the heat of combustion for conventional diatomic H2 is shown in thermodynamic tables, the values for the monoatomic 2H + O, H2O reaction is not usually shown. It is calculated in the following:

(13) Dissociation of diatomic hydrogen gas into hydrogen atoms (consumes energy): H2(g) ? 2H(g) … ?H = 217.998 kj (e17)
Dissociation of diatomic oxygen gas into oxygen atoms: (consumes energy): O2(g) ? 2O(g) … ?H = 249.18 kj (e18)
Combustion of diatomic H2 and O2 to form water as steam (releases energy): H2(g) + 1/2O2(g) ? H2O(g) … ?H = -241.826 kj (e19)
Dissociation of diatomic H2 and O2 molecules into monoatomic form (consumes energy): H2(g) + 1/2O2(g) ? 2H(g) + O(g) … ?H = 217.988 + 1/2*249.18 kj = 342.578 kj (e20)
Combustion of monoatomic H and O to form water as steam (releases energy): 2H(g) + O(g) ? H2O(g) … ?H = -(342.578 + 249.18) kj = -591.758 kj (e21)
Combustion of diatomic oxyhydrogen into water in the form of steam (releases energy): H2(g) + 1/2O2(g) ? H2O(g) … ?H = -241.826 kj (e22)
Combustion of monoatomic oxyhydrogen (releases energy): 2H(g) + O(g) ? H2O(g) … ?H = -591.758 kj (e23)

Combusting a certain amount (by weight) of oxyhydrogen releases about 2.45 times more energy if the oxyhydrogen is monoatomic instead of diatomic. Monoatomic oxyhydrogen has twice the volume for the same weight than does diatomic oxyhydrogen. This means that igniting one liter of monoatomic oxyhydrogen releases only about 1.23 more energy than the same volume of diatomic oxyhydrogen. However the theoretical energy consumption to dissociate one liter of monoatomic oxyhydrogen from water is half of that required to dissociate one liter of conventional diatomic oxygen and hydrogen gases.

It may also be noted that when the two Hydrogen atoms merge photons in the UV band are released. In order to inhibit this merger it may be possible to subject the Hydrogen to strong UV (class C) radiation. Here also is a curious dichotomy; whereas water absorbs IR radiation during efficient electrolysis and whereas it releases UV radiation when the electrons spin down to their lowest energy state and combine into molecular Hydrogen (2H). The initial part of this process is of a lower energy order than the latter. To all intents this is a thermodynamic breakage and proves the authors earlier hypothesis that the electrochemical equations must be performed in their correct order to make proper sense.

# Electrical features in Electrolysis: The theoretical decomposition voltage for electrolysis is 1.23 volts at room temperature ((14) 16 – 20 degrees C), however because of over-voltage of H on the cathode and also due to cell resistance itself voltages of 2.00 to 2.25 volts are usually required. Over voltage relates to charge held in the cell, the cell acting as an inefficient battery (resistance, capacitance, inductance). The following table shows the over-voltage as measured in the author’s cells at various times and the calculated power input required for electrolysis:

In the left column are voltages read at various times and in the right column are theoretical voltages to apply for electrolysis (see original document).

The cells are comprised of disc interleave stacked electrodes. Potassium Hydroxide (KOH) 1:30, distilled water, 30 Deg.C, 1.27 MOhm (with electrolyte) from 120 MOhm (without electrolyte). Calculating Ohms Law says that at the higher impedance more current can be supplied:
1 – E=IxR ; I=E/R ; R=E/I
2 – 12 volts (nominal) / 3 cells = 4 volts per cell
3 – TO determine current: E/R ; E =4, R= 12×106, I= 10x 36 (e24)

When lowering the electrolyte impedance to c.l.2 kOhm the current will be 300 Amps, theoretically ..

…takes no consideration any voltage drop at the electrodes. On Mk1.1 the reactor experienced an 8 to 10 Volt drop when powered at 12 – 14 Volts. If three cells are connected in series the voltage at each is 4 volts, the voltage drop therefore renders the reactor inoperative and in series only the centre cell produces significant quantities of gas. As electrolyte is added and the cell impedance drops the power consumption increases as does the gas output.

Ohms Law dictates the current and voltage levels in the cell are relative to resistance, however clear signs emerge during testing that there is a kink in this Law. Whereas the cell resistance at 10kOhm , 1.23 Volts – load should equate to 0.13 milliAmps in fact the reciprocal of this value is obtained. In all electronic/electrical circuits heat is generated. When powering the cell with increased voltages ranging from 6 to 40 volts heat is generated and the cell warms up as would be expected in an exothermic system. When voltage is reduced to that dictated by Faraday’s Laws of Electrolysis the cell cools and begins to absorb energy from the surrounding atmosphere, that is; the circuit becomes endothermic. In order to keep the cell temperature at that required for highly efficient electrolysis IR radiation must be introduced to keep the electrolyte warm.

This breakage in Ohms Law is repugnant to most and many have stated that it is impossible. The clamp meter does not lie, how can Ohms Law be rent asunder in this manner? The answer lies within thermodynamic systems reported by Willhelm Wein in studies of Black Body radiation and is defined in the Wein Displacement Law (15) The increase of the mobility of an ion in high electrical field. The mobility of an ion is somewhat decreased by the presence of the ionic atmosphere because the predominantly oppositely charged ions surrounding the central ion will tend to hold it back. This effect is included in the normally measured mobility. However, when the ion is exposed to very high electrical field, it will move so fast that it will, in effect, leave behind its atmosphere which does not have time to reform, and the mobility of the ion (consequently the electrical conductivity of the solution) will increase. See also the Debye-Falkenhagen effect.: b=lmax T=C2/4.96511423 (e25)

And that electrolysis does not follow the usual VI curve usually associated with electronic circuits. 16″The v-i transfer function always applies. Impedance is the instantaneous slope of that function”. Mathematically this can be stated resistance: R = dV / dI . Ohm’s law, as stated, is just a specific case of the above were dV / dI remains constant for a (in practice limited) range of voltage and current. Materials where R is constant over a useful range of voltages are sometimes referred to as ‘ohmic’. The “big R” in R = dV / dI is NOT intended to denote a constant, since the differential term dV / dI (or slope) is only a constant in the linear case. R is a variable representing a variable resistance. R is a constant r is a variable. The issue is that the resistance of a cell is nonlinear which means that it exhibits different resistances at different operating points of voltage and current. At any given point of current and voltage, ohms law very much does apply. When you measure the resistance with a simple ohmmeter, you are measuring it at one point, a point with a very low sense voltage. The resistance is high at this voltage, the cell is barely in conduction. At a different, higher voltage, say several volts, the cells conduction increases, the resistance drops and the current comes on as observed. If you had an ohmmeter that measured at that higher voltage, it would show the appropriate low resistance. There are many electrical devices that exhibit non- linear behavior besides electrolytic cells. The common diode comes to mind. There the resistance is a function of polarity in addition to being nonlinear in the forward direction. At a few millivolts of forward voltage, most diodes have a resistance of megohms. This decreases down to an ohm or below as the voltage exceeds .7 volts. Note that these nonlinearities have nothing to do with reactance as applied to AC circuits with inductors and capacitors.

# *Hydrogen is NOT just an energy carrier: Don Lancaster, co-inventor of the microprocessor, in his paper (17) EnergFun claims that Hydrogen is not in fact a fuel but merely an energy carrier.

There are only three elements in combustion, known as the combustion triangle, namely; Fuel, Oxidiser and Heat. If this is the case then Hydrogen is clearly a fuel. Every fuel known to mankind features Hydrogen in the mix: Hydrocarbons, fuel gas(es), coal and even wood all contain various amounts of Hydrogen and in the Hydrocarbons, the lengths of the Hydrogen-Carbon chains determine it’s combustive potency; Ipso Facto Hydrogen is a Fuel.

Facts of the matter so often overlooked, in particular in the Internet newsgroup; http://groups.google.com/sci.energy.hydrogen by group participants is that Hydrogen is highly explosive in air. So explosive, in fact that it is considered a (18) concussive, as opposed to an incendiary explosion. And even more explosive still when the Hydrogen gas is proportionately mixed with Oxygen – there being insufficient Oxygen available in air to provide complete Hydrogen combustion (without invoking non-combustive Nitrogen). What is missed is that the explosive energy far exceeds the disassociation energy and then the onset of molecular cooling sets in.

Flame speed: Hydrogen in Oxygen 3900 meters/sec, concussive; Petroleum in air 30cm/sec, incendiary.

# Satefyt: From a safety standpoint it may be propitious that when Hydrogen goes off there is little risk of colateral fire the event being over so quicky that in most cases nearby combustables cannot get enough heat for a long enough period to spontaineously catch alight. Certainly there will be colateral damage to surrounding materials, but then-again; the event is so rapid that the force accelerates past and heavier items will remain largely unaffected. Hardware involved in the event, the gas containment device – for example, will exhibit fractures and other effects of explosive energy. Protective equipment shouls be used including hearing and eye protection.

# The Infrastructure Hobgoblin: In our consumer society much ado is made of our dependence on multinational corporations to provide materials for our sustenance and advancement. Notwithstanding anecdotal stories of cloak-and-dagger conspiracies, I contend that ill fate suffered by inventors in the energy field has been perpetrated by other jealous inventors and not by way of corporate shenanigans. Even if, in times past such corporations have embarked on criminal activities the world has changed dramatically. The political assemblies becoming more representative of a wider range of populace are somewhat more enlightened than was the case in the relatively recent oil crisis in 1974, dodgy dealings are less likely to be perpetrated now.

In 2005 the world faces new energy crises. On one hand the globe is nine (19)times over-subscribed in electricity generation the detraction being found in transmission inefficiencies and on the other hand global conflict and excessive demand has had a negative effect on oil supply thrusting the price of oil to record highs. There is no evidence that the world is running out of oil and there is also no evidence that it is not. Petrochemicals will always have a place in society providing us with useful products including industrial chemicals, lubricants, fuels and plastics. What is a moot point is whether recent discussions about the “Hydrogen Economy” bear any relevance insofar as Hydrogen Infrastructure is concerned. Hydrogen may be produced in almost any location on Earth, the Author envisages appliance sized gas plants placed in homes, plugged into the wall and generating Hydrogen and Oxygen by electrolysis for automotive use. The proponent drives the vehicle into the garage and connects to the Hydrogen source which replenishes the tank(s) thus emptying the stored Hydrogen. After driving off again the appliance continues operating 24/7 refilling tanks for later use.

The foregoing becomes academic in the face of on-board, on-demand fuel systems contained within the engine bay which produces all of the engines’ needs in which refueling is accomplished either by way of introduced distilled water or by the rain water falling on the vehicle during use that is then collected and distilled in a heat exchanger also within the engine bay. The question then is; what point infrastructure?

# Credit where it;s due: For the most part the prototypes constructed to demonstrate the power and practicability of EGas as a fuel rest with work done in the 1970’s by an English immigrant to New Zealand, namely; Archie Blue. What this writer has done is to take the kernels of Mr. Blue’s work, develop and improve upon it in order to bring about devices that not only work but that also may be held up for meeting or exceeding industrial standards, materials safety data sheets and for dissemination of the information to a world-wide audience.

In this section the writer will discuss the originating invention and the work performed to improve upon it.

In the early 1970’s Archie Blue demonstrated his electrolysis device to engineers in both New Zealand and Guernsey. Practical limits where the Mini that it ran on would only accomplish low speeds, use copious amounts of water and dissolved aluminium electrodes such that, although it worked, it did not work for long periods.

The original devices sighted by the author were in Agee preserving jars. Clearly the wrong material to use. Furthermore, the power supplied to the electrolysers was taken straight from the vehicles electrical system which caused excessive heating and melted wires. No work was performed by Mr. Blue to explain the devices in terms of Faradays Laws of Electrolysis. The electrolyte was Sulphuric Acid (Battery Acid) and on the application of electrical current the aluminium electrodes began to dissolve releasing EGas in the process. This EGas was then fed into the modified S.U. brand carburettor for direct induction to the combustion chambers.

What has this author done to improve upon and develop the original invention?
– The electrolysis units have been constructed of stainless steel
– Heavy duty check valves are placed at the top of each cell
– Potassium Hydroxide is added as electrolyte
– Sacrificial electrodes have been dispensed with in favour of stainless steel.
– The pressure source is added from the bottom of the cells
– The electrical supply is induced at the bottom of the cells so that no surfaces are exposed to EGas
– The pressure source is provided by gas from the exhaust
– A seperate power supply has been added that allows for voltage adjustment
– Electrical characteristics have been defined
– Harmonic resonance has been added to electrodes

The crux of the invention has been retained as it relates to using three electrolysis cells, the output from the one cell feeding the input to the next which appears to enrich the gas evolved from the output of the third and final cell. Direct injection to the modified S.U. brand carburettor has been dispensed with in favour of using an Impco brand natural gas regulator. The new and improved unit also has safety features built into it such as pressure relief valves

Electrolysis can be made very efficient and high nineties (percent efficiency) is not difficult to accomplish. With the combination provided by way of Faradays Laws wherein temperature is maintained at c.75 Deg.C, voltage at 1.27 volts (above electrode overvoltage) and power in the kilowatts efficiency of 97.5% is not unrealistic. It must be pointed out that at these parameters the electrolytic process tunnels into an exothermic state. Although, stricktly speaking all circuits generate heat and therefore losses, they operate endothermically and all physical laws are complied with. Not-so electrolysis, clearly this state of change has an effect – in particular Ohms Law appears to break. One must now approach the calculations vis-a-vis efficiency within the bounds of Blackbody Radiation and the Wein Effect. Coming back to this “combination”; whereas Tero Ranta’s data shows that better than 100% efficiency can be accomplished without addition of any other tricky bits, the notion of providing electromechanical motion using small quantities of power to release larger amounts of gas in this system will add to the output efficiency.

# Summary: Before there was water there was only gas. In space water is formed by electrical discharges through reasonably dense atomic/molecular clouds. Terrestrial water was formed by three routes:
1 – Water captured from space
2 – Electrical discharges, and latterly;
3 – Cellular metabolism.

A small electrical discharge sets in motion chain reactions between Hydrogen and Oxygen in a physical event that releases orders of magnitude more energy than is required to then, in an electrochemical reaction, break apart the resulting oxide – there being no detractions from physical law when these facts are processed in their correct order. The oxide does not exist prior to the gas!.

So far as Electrolytic Gas’ use as an internal combustion fuel is concerned it must be noted that the first ever internal combustion engine (20)invented in c.1807AD used Electrolytic Gas as its fuel.

# Further Discussion: The most popular forum in which the vicissitudes of all things “Electrolytic Gas” are discussed may be found at

– http://groups.yahoo.com/group/watercar
– http://groups.yahoo.com/group/egas
– http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gobox
– nttp://groups.google.com/alt.sci.hydrogen
– nttp://groups.google.com/alt.energy.homepower

Please note that the terms “egas” and “egaspower” are proprietory, copy protected – the trademarks owned by the author.

# Further Reading: All about water: http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/index.html

Not necessarily quoted in this paper: – North American Combustion Handbook. Chemical Process Industries.
– Quality Control : Crown Research Limited. C/- Dr. Tony Clemens. Dr. Robert Neil Boyd
– About the Author:
– Addendum : Items in this paper marked thus are incomplete

# References:
(1) 2006 ; (2) 2002 ; (3) Also called: Water Gas, Rhodes Gas, Browns Gas ; (4) Other formulations appear to show this figure may increase to 120% and more.
(5) Organic Chemistry, Morrison & Boyd, Allyn and Bacon, Inc. LCCCN:66-25695.
(6) www.ktf-split.hr/periodni/en
(7) ‘Fuel from Water’ M.A. Peavey. Merit, Inc. LCCCN 88-188956 ISBN 0-945516-04-5 Page 22.
(8) http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/-lvw/what/ads/adxe.html
(9)http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/vibrat.html ; (10) Courtesy Tero Ranta ; (11) ‘L’ = Litres ; (12) Courtesy Tero Ranta ;
(13) CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 84th ed. ; (14) Faraday’s Law requires a temperature of circa 75 degrees Celcius ;
(15) http://electrochem.cwru.edu/ed/dict.htm#w01 ; (16) http://sci.energy.hydrogen
(17) Reproduced, see Apendix 1 ; (18) Proprietes of Hydrogen Combustion. NACA report 1983.
(19) http://www.wired.com ; (20) De Rivas

## PETER LOWRIE, Water Electrolysis for Combustion Engine from ‘D6.pdf’ available at http://www.panaceauniversity.org/D6.pdf

Peter is developing a water electrolysis system for internal combustion engines. To date, he has managed to run a 1,66cc engine for 17 minutes on water alone. The engine block remains cool but flame comes out of the exhaust pipe, which causes it to become very hot. Also, the engine runs flat out and cannot be thrttled back. Presumably, this is due to excessive amounts of hydrogen entering the engine, so a method of increasing the proportion of air in the mix appears to be needed. The really important point is that there is excess energy in the system. There are two possibilities: either the water contains energy which has not yet been discovered and documented, or additional energy is coming from somewhere else. …

The system which Peter is using is unusual:

Peter uses a GEC delta-wound, marine alternator which he modifies by removing the diodes and leading each of the three phase-windings out to his electronics. He uses each of the three phase-windings to power one electrolysis cell. As he only wants about 1.5 volts across each cell, he applies about 2 volts to the DC winding of the alternator, which is about the minimum for the alternator to work.

The DC current supplied is less than one amp while the pulsed current to the electrolysis cells is much higher. When a snap-on ammeter surrounds the wires to the cells, a current of 800 amps is displayed. It is likely that this style of ammeter is calibrated for sine-wave alternating current, and so the actual RMS (average) current is almost certainly different to the displayed value. What is certain, is that the current supplied to the cells is enormously higher than the DC input, and it may be in excess of the 800 amps displayed.

A point of particular interest is the inductor placed between the electrolysis cells and the windings of the alternator. Peter describes this as a choke out of 3-phase industrial power supply. It is comprised of a laminated steel core with a sheeet of copper wound around it. This is remarkably like the arrangement used by Edwin Gray’s power tube which picked up sufficient Radiant Energy to power an 80 horsepower electrical motor. Edwin’s device used two or three cylinders of perforated copper sheet surrounding a conductor which was fed with 80 microsecond unidirectional pulses. This inductor is so similar in construction that it might not be unreasonable to suspect that the steel core mught have very short electrical pulses induced in it, generating radiant waves of Radiant Energy which are picked up by the copper sheet winding and fed into the system providing a major additional source of energy for the electrolysis. This may well be the reason that this system produces easily enough gas mixture to run an engine.

As the motor is supplying mechanical power to the alternator shaft, it is not possible to say that there is a current gain of 800 times. What is certain, is that there is indeed a pick-up of external energy in this system. This can be expected, as a sudden pulse of large current into each cell will generate a major magnetic pulse which in turn may well tap the external energy field. This is very like the effect experienced by Ed Gray, Robert Adams, Tom Bearden, Floyd Sweet and others, when they produced large rapidly-changing magnetic fields. As remarked above, Peter’s engine couldn’t run on water alone without gaining extra energy from somewhere – don’t forget that the engine produces the mechanical and DC power fed to the electrolysis units. To sustain the engine running, the system has to be over 100% efficient. As an engineer, I can assure you that Peter’s engine is not over 100% efficient, and yet it does run, which shows condusively that it is picking up extra energy from somewhere. I expect that in the near future, we will be able to say from where the extra energy is coming.

A comment from a member of the Yahoo ‘egaspower’ Group: ‘When I joined this group in March, I saw for the first time Peter Lowrie’s statement that the power out was 8 to 11 times that of the electricity required. I didn’t quite believe it but thought that you might just get the engine to idle based on George Wiseman’s calculations that the monoatomic molecules where giving almost 4 times the energy of diatomic ones.

When I first tried it, my motor ran at the full 5,500 rpm and not at an idle as I had expected. The power generated in Peter’s mode of operation is about 39 times what you put in if you allow for the fact that the motor is only about 25% efficient. I then loaded my motor to the full rated load and found that there was no lack of power. I have not completed the last step of returning the exhaust to the input of the cells, but I have every confidence that what he says he is doing is indeed a fact.’

It is not a device whose output power exceeds it’ input power. However, this device is very significant in that it raises the efficiency of an internal combustion engine, and in doing so, achieves a reduction in the amount of fossil fuel being burnt in the engine. This makes it unpopular with the oil companies whose objective is to sell as much fossil fuel as possible, at as high a price as possible.

# Adds from ‘D9.pdf’ page 8-9, a Patrick Kelly file on different Electrolysers, available at http://www.panaceauniversity.org/D6.pdf

Peter Lowrie has succeeded by increasing the current to where a clamp-ammeter shows between 800 and 900 amps flowing into each of his three Archie Blue style electrolysers. This produces enough hydroxy gas to run the engine and produce the electrical power for the electrolyser cells by driving an extra alternator. His design uses a marine alternator, driven by the engine, to apply pulses of electrical power to an electrolyser cell attached to each of the three alternator windings. Peter’s design uses a heat exchanger to heat the gas coming from the electrolysers, before it is fed to the engine. The cascaded electrolyser cells are fed from the engine exhaust, with the volume controlled by an impulse valve. When the engine runs faster, the trigger impulses from the manifold vacuum increase in frequency, feeding more exhaust gas into the electrolysers.

The hydroxy gas, mixed with Nitrous Oxide, Carbon Monoxide and Carbon Dioxide (from the exhaust gases) is heated and passed through a flashback arrestor bubbler, which has an impulse valve positioned on each side of it. The heated gas mix if then passed through a check valve and mixed with air, whose inflow is also controlled by an impulse valve. A final butterfly valve sets the flow to the engine intake.

If the engine stalls, the trigger impulses to the impulse valve stop immediately and the electrolysis current stops as the alternator stops running. The electrolysis cells are intended to run hot at about 85 deg.C. When the engine is started from cold, the pulsed voltage applied to the field coil of the alternator is set at 24 volts. When this increased power level starts to heat up the electrolyte in the cells, the voltage to the field coil is reduced proggressively, until it reaches the 2 volt level, where very little power is taken up in heating the electrolyte.

An electronic circuit (not shown) is arranged to fire the very powerfull Silicon Controlled Rectifiers (SCRs or Thyristors) at the voltage peak of each output cycle for its electrolyser cell. The coil shown between the cells and the earth (engine chassis voltage) comes from an industrial 3-phase power supply. It is of very heavy construction to ahndle the very large current, made with insulated copper strip wound around a steel core. Each cell will have a controlled water-supply system as the water levels will fall rapidly due to the very large volume of hydroxy gas being produced.

It has been suggested that the circuit would be more efficient if the half-wave SCR circuit shown above were replaced with a full-wave arrangement. This has not been tried yet, but a number of problems arise with that idea. Firstly, the cables carrying the current to the electrolyser cells, show a reading of 900 amps when a standard clamp-ammeter is placed around the cable. That is a very large current, requiring exceptionally large cables to carry it effectively. If a full-wave circuit is introduced, then the power diisipated in the cables will be doubled. This is liable to cause problems unless the already expensive cables are increased in size. Secondly, the frequency of the field coil electronics will be doubled as there will be twice as many voltage peaks per second, so the circuit timing components will need to be changed. Thirdly, the SCRs are already very expensive due to their very high current handling capacities. If full-wave operation is introduced, either there will need to be twice as many expensive SCRs, or Triacs of even higher specification will need to be used. Since the design works well in its present form, there does not appear to be any reason to modify it.

Scroll to Top