Comments on: Xogen Technologies’ Scam, Electrolysis By Any Other Name

By: jay_1_2_3

jay_1_2_3 — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:06:46 +0000

You guys are missing it! The main difference between Xogen and a Faraday style of electrolysis is how the power is utilized. Xogen is using something similar to a high voltage step system to polarize and separate electrons as opposed to a sustained high amperage current. Xogen is using Stan Meyer's patents for the invention he called a “water fuel cell”.
The idea people should demand is there has got to be a better way to split water. Look at a fish it separates oxygen from water just by flapping its gills! Water passes though a thin membrane in the gill and with a flapping motion it separates oxygen from water at greater than 80% efficiency!
When focused we can do the unthinkable like man traveling to the moon. We pool all the best scientists just to build incredibly advanced weapons of mass destruction and not machines of over unity. You are a moron if you think we could not have figured out free energy and clean water by now!

By: HL

HL — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 01:02:47 +0000

Permanent Magnet Technology is a Free Energy Science, one that has purposely ignored by engineering schools for a whole century. Wonder why? Because it is free!

I am employing free hydrogen fuel assist to my Church van, a 95 Dodge Caravan. My highway mileage has jumped from 19 to 29 mpg. Free mileage!

Dponce80 take a "feel from the Sun"; more free energy.

By: MR NOCHE

MR NOCHE — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:06:18 +0000

The press did not pay attention to the Wright Brothers for over 1 year before they
saw them fly over their heads and then believe man could fly. Before then when the locomotive train was still in concept, they thought if you went faster than 25 mph, you would suffocate due to oxygen starvation. The technology of the Atom as stated before. Tachyons on paper bends Einstein’s fixed speed of light. The one fact that remains is economics and status quo base don Oil. What would happen to many world economies if you came with a proven working technology that would pretty much replace Oil as the primary energy source? The movie Syriana scratches the surface of the tree huggers angle of the oil powers desire to remain on top. I don’t hate tree huggers, I don’t hate skeptics who hang on concrete facts and dispel unproven theories. I know one thing for a fact, anyone (anyone) who comes close to getting this working to a point where it commercially viable will have visitors knocking at their doors. Not because you have proven that Faradays, Newton’s or Einstein’s theories can bend, but you are a threat to an economic way of life. This is not a conspiracy nut speaking, its just business. Our saving grace is the internet, our Pandora’s box.. For those who are working on this (me for one) don’t think you will get a patent and retire on a beach while your invention technology is released to betterment of man. I am not a tree hugger I hate Al Gore, biggest hypocrite to taunt the “green” label. This needs to be distributed freely for any change to occur. I for one and my geek friends have decided to see if this is a doable concept and if applicable to use in a car where it would do the most good in this country and elsewhere put it out for all to use and maybe improve upon. Running a car is laot harder than producing enough to drive it, you have to think about regulating it and take into considerations all the electronics regulating on gas not hydrogen. (IE. Map Sensors and Oxygen Sensors, ect ect). So even if you can produce enough you have to adapt the car. Now for some facts. :

Some hydrogen/gasoline facts:

The available chemical energy when Hydrogen burns is 143 megaJoules per kilogram
This is 39.7kWHr/kg
Standard gasoline has 13kWHr/kg which is 35.944 kWHr/gal
If I have a car that burns 1 gal per hour (which is typical for SUVs on the highway or smaller cars in city traffic), (most cars getting 20 mpg @ 60 mph equal 3 gallon ok.. so this is one gallon for math’s sake)
Then the equivalent hydrogen is 0.905 kg which at 2 grams per mole yields 453 moles.
And each mole at STP (standard temperature and pressure) takes up 22.7 liters,
Thus our gallon of gas equivalent hydrogen has a volume (@STP) of 10300 liters.
This equates to approximately 363 cubic feet. If this is stored at high pressure in standard sized scuba tanks you would need about 4.5 tanks to hold a gallon equivalent of gasoline. Think about what you need for 10 gallons, 25gallons? And I have assumed no loss of energy.
Theoretically the best electrolytic cells can have 94% efficiency. But real world cells only achieve 70%.
Now our gallon of gasoline equivalent of hydrogen contains 35.944 kWHr – that’s 35944 watts times hours. If we plan to extract hydrogen using electricity, and if we wish to extract the gallon equivalent in just one hour, we then need 35944 watts of power for the whole hour. Recall a watt is a volt times an amp. The minimum voltage electrolysis needs is 1.23 volts. Thus 36000 watts equates to about 30000 amps. Do you see a problem with practicality? So this is why Meyers
Concept must work in order to circumvent this.

Now do you see why my diatribe could be a real long read? I think this is possible , but not based on current facts and laws of physics, thus the need for abstract thinking. So Meyers Cell does work, but can it make that much to power a car and what changes will have to be made to the car for long term safe use. So Skeptics have grounds and the
Theorist have a lot of work to do. Let the games begin.

By: kaosad

kaosad — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:55:23 +0000

PMW? 40kV? That are a bunch of craps. You can release hydrogen+oxygen even with an ordinary electrolysis process. I bet you can’t easily attain 40kV before breakdown which happens at much lower voltage.

By: Myles

Myles — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 08:40:53 +0000

What if when burning the HHO, one produces a neutron stream in the flame? Think about the expansion of monatomic hydrogen.. the proton and electron move away from eachother.. What’s the first thing that proton’s gonna bump? an electron.. what does that make it? a Neutron.. this is not about ‘free’ energy, its about mass to energy.. a very small part of the HHO dissapears into neutrons.. Which is why the High volatge, pulsed DC “electrolysis” produces more energy, it’s because it doesn’t just make 2H2 and O2, it makes 2H1 and O1.. which burns differently.. Somoe of it burns, some of it fuses.. Not cold fusion, micro fusion. The law of conservation stands.. but this is using some of the mass (one single hydrogen atom per neutron created) of water and converting it to energy. That’s how it melts tungsten. most of the hydrogen burns, most of the hydrogen is H2, but some of it, while the rest is burning, fuses into neutrons. Ta da.

By: dan

dan — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 10:39:07 +0000

the guy that wrote this article is obviously scared about what he doesn’t know. Fact is a oil company invested 2 million in Xogen and they continue to progress despite ignorance from people like you calling there work a scam. Fact is several people have done what Xogen does for example Yull Brown, Stanley Meyer and Daniel Dingle -John Kansus. So jack ass educate yourself before you make yourself look even dumber. by the way i’ve made my own hydrogen on demand system that fuels my chevy tbi v8 conversion van. so bite me David Ponce this simple technology works.

By: george

george — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:25:14 +0000

Some of you guys just dont get it. this is not conventional electrolysis, which is very inefficient, creates heat, and uses lots of amps. Xogen was formed from Stan Meyers invention. The Meyer’s fuel cell uses water as a dielectric material to create a capacitor. The voltage is multiplied by a transformer circuit, which lowers the amperage, which is then used to charge the cap. The charging is done in pulsed stages so as not to short itself out prematurely. Putting inductors and capacitors together creates a band pass filter. In other words, only a limited range of frequencies passes through the circuit (the resonant frequency of water). Therefore, 12 volts go in, which is multiplied to up to 40,000 volts which reduces the amps to as little as one half. All this voltage enters the negative side of the capacitor, which is one plate and charges that plate to 40,000 volts. A capacitor is two metal plates separated by a dielectric material (low conductivity, high resistance). In this design, the dielectric material is water, which is not a good conductor as illustrated by the fact that you need a catalyst in conventional electrolysis. The design is intended to fail or short itself out (All the voltage stored in the capacitor is converted to amps) when it reaches critical voltage, which ultimately destroys the hydrogen bonds. It draws less power to charge the cap and the cap is used to convert all that voltage back to amps. So you see its not electrolysis. So, you pulse charge a capacitor, in this case two metal plates separated by water. The cap reaches critical voltage and shorts its self out destroying the hydrogen bonds in the process. The process begins all over again. This occurs many times a second as illustrated by the video.

By: Besworks

Besworks — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:41:26 +0000

It most certainly does work. I have built a similar device myself and have seen the combustion happening. The technology is not designed as a replacement for petroleum fuel but as an enhancement to existing combustion engines.

The Oxyhydrogen (read wikipedia) is a very fast and clean burning fuel. In large enough quantities it could power a car on it’s own but you run into corrosion and seizing issues after some time. In smaller quantities it can be used to offset the amount of petroleum fuel being used. By leaning out the fuel mixture (more air vs liquid fuel) and injecting the oxyhydrogen into the air intake of the engine you can use less liquid fuel and get the same amount of power to drive the vehicle.

Oxyhydrogen burns at a rate of 2000 feet per second (much faster than gasoline). When mixed with gasoline it acts as a catalyst causing more of the liquid fuel to be consumed rather than expelled as exhaust or clinging to the inside of the cylinders. Since the byproduct of combustion is pure water you are also cleaning and cooling the engine at the same time.

For those of you who still believe this is a scam you should read up on the catalytic converter. That is one scam of a device if I ever saw one. They tell you it lowers emissions but what they don’t tell you is that to do so they simply burn up the excess fuel from the engine strokes and waste it as heat. And these devices are mandatory on ALL vehicles (at least in North America, I don’t know about elsewhere).

I’ll leave you all with a link to a commercial product that uses the same technology. It’s a hydrogen powered hobby rocket. I personally own one of these units so can vouch for the authenticity of it.

http://www.estesrockets.com/products.php?number=1876

By: Omar

Omar — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:22:28 +0000

google “stanley myers and water power”

By: Wolf

Wolf — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 02:12:10 +0000

Uh Rich, Perhaps YOU are the one with green card, because if you could understand English you would have been able to read the meaningful text Tom wrote. He was only encouraging those that are experimenting to keep it up. It’s a good thing. Many believed that the helicopter would never work because it goes against the laws of physics. The narrow minded idiots never realized it actually followed a different set of physical laws than they were hung up on. You seem to be one of these narrow minded people with no vision or ability to think outside the box. You should consider another forum for your comments, try the ‘I need to learn how to spell “WRIITEN” because I’m a Zoloft consuming PILL of a human being’ Website.