If the MIG 675 lives up to it\'s hype of being
able to run on hydrogen derived from the
surrounding water source, that is fantastic !!!
Costing a mere EUR250,000 (US$329,727),
I can imagine that they have worked out all
those nasty little electro-chemical conversion
\'hurtles\' of liberating hydrogen from water.
I just hope there are a sufficient bank of
batteries to provide electrolysis \'juice\' to
safely get them back to port.
... If they were using batteries to power \"electrolysis\" it would be 100x more efficient to just use the current with a brushless motor rather than losing energy making Hydrogen only to lose energy burning it... I would bet the farm its a 500hp gas engine with \"hydrogen fuel additive\" created from the water its sitting in. If they had Seawater to fuel generator they would have no need to build boats, they would the richest people on earth.
In the engineering world there\'s a saying that energy is not created not destroyed... If they\'re claiming it produces hydrogen without extra input, that\'s nothing more than BS \'cause they need energy to break down the hydrogen from water probably using electrolysis. Nothing can run indefinitely... \'cause we got entropy chaising our tails...
Ing Ernesto Rivera
I too, wonder about the hydrogen issues. If they have to carry big batteries with them to power the electrolysis, then what\'s the point of the fuel cell if they could just run purely electric, BombR76? It would be smarter to just carry some amount of hydrogen with them to power the fuel cell for electricity. Without any real details, I don\'t see a point in posting this yet. Same goes for that D-dalus thing, it\'s been months since that article was published without a followup with details and/or a video. I still wonder how the heck that thing works. It\'s killing me.
We\'re about 3 1/2 months too early for April 1.
Apart from the comments regarding the hydrogen production which is absolutely impossible from the scientific point of view but I can\'t see any room for a SHOWER and A TOILET!!!
Thats a Fox headline if I ever saw one. It\'s not gonna trick a bunch of engineers
Fox headline agreed. I doubt there is sufficient \"free\" H2 in seawater to run a flashlight, let alone a 500 hp ICE.
We can dream just fine. But we also know about real world science.
The hydrogen could be produced from solar cells and stored. Would take ages to fill a reasonable sized tank though.
Alternatively it could be produced by reacting zinc or something similar with the sea water.
To get a good range and the ability to refuel easily and quickly and cheaply would be a challenge. I am looking forward to hearing how it is done.
I read Not ONE Positive comment!
Are ALL of \'those posting\' Devoid of Dreams?
Have You been Taught: \'Not To Dream!\'?
Have You been Taught: \'Not Possible!\'?
Roy J Stewart,
Goes againts the first and second law of thermodynamics. Water is not an energy source. Someone who didn\'t sleep through highschool physics class should know this with certainty.
Company claims seems unbelieavable as they purpotedly single-handedly solved the single most prolific problem solving hurdle the world has ever faced, namely practical renewable clean portable energy generation.
This boat uses a salt water hydrogen generator for instant hydrogen fuel to burn on demand for its adapted Mercruiser engine.
Pretty cool, no CO2...just H2O!
The MIG 675 specs says \"The generator can produce electricity for the whole boat without battery, day and night.\"
They are likely using a salt water and aluminum or aluminum-magnesium reactor to generate hydrogen. The aluminum gets used up and would have to be replaced.
However, water actually can be an energy source...
Since there\'s naturally over 150 parts per million deuterium in sea water, a gallon of sea water has energy equivalent to 300 gallons of gasoline!
There are companies now working on safe personal reactors that will soon make the burning of fuels look silly.
Oxidizing a metal like sodium in water could provide a sufficiency of hydrogen until you run out of refined metal, but configuring the engine to run on acetylene and using calcium carbide to generate it on board would probably be more cost effective and still keep the gas, or diesel out of the water. Solar power or a salt imbalance battery could be used to extract the hydrogen but you would have to wait days if not weeks for enough fuel for a couple hours of use.
You humans make no sense ,1 you invent a machine to stop pollution with the next step sound reduction to not harm water life 2 you price this machine above all most all humans capasity then finaly u all cheer these makers of luxury itmes.Baffeling if anything we sould condem such behaviour ,it is why the world is the way the world is,pretty messed up with such logic.Releasing this tecnolgy to all people would not only save the world but make us all happy.One day ,,one god dam day ul see
I want one....
Especially I want the fuel cell technology....
Running a 500 HP engine on hydrogen is easy, just stick it into the engine...
Most modern cars running on unleaded fuels could handle a \'lifetime\' of running on hydrogen with no ill effect... AND hydrogen is the easiest thing in the world to burn completely..... (efficiently) just add air, and it will burn over a huge range of fuel/air mixtures... Companies like BMW who claim some \"Breakthrough\" or other re H2 in internal combustion engines are just gaining media coverage.....
BUT... making the fuel that\'s the kicker... (as is often said, hydrogen is merely an energy carrier, much like all of the hydrocarbons, the energy has to come from somewhere, just that with oil, the energy comes from the SUN and inside the earth (takes heat and pressure to make oil) they are all just energy carriers, but some are more convenient to use than others...
Yep, using a sacrificial metal anode, but then you have to replace the anode every so-often... (people often forget that one of the MOST FUEL EFFICIENT common battery component manufacturers are the aluminium smelters (al (or Zn etc) + acid = hydrogen used for hundreds of years to produce hydrogen), sure they use heaps of electricity, but they also produce heaps of Al. and if the electricity is hydro solar or (dare I) nuclear, that is a storable, green fuel source ) the cost of the metal will likely be less than the cost of the fuel which was replaced, again making enough in the time is not always easy.... (economics will rule)
Remember the Hindenburg... It was lifted by huge hydrogen filled gas bags (helium lifting bags would have to have been 4 times the volume, but its engines ran of diesel fuel oil.. Why?? because that was a cheaper alternative re, manufacture, storage and carriage... (if the hydrogen fuel had been cheaper, the other problems would have been overcome by engineering solutions, remember the Nazi\'s scientists were not dumb.) we have come a long way, but maybe not so far afterall..
NOTE, if they are burning the hydrogen in an engine, then the boat is also emitting Nox, unavoidable when heating air to high temperatures, so not as clean as you may think, still would produce smog on the large scale..
what is the generator using for fuel????????????????????????????????????
It is easy to make an ICE engine not produce Nox, you just burn all the oxygen with fuel. With hydrocarbon fuel such as gasoline, and diesel you will need to run overly rich and this will result in photo-reactive smog, but any unburnt hydrogen will just loft away harmlessly. However running at the optimal fuel air mix will usually result in massively overheating the engine. (In gasoline aircraft engines they run either 20% rich or lean to avoid overheating.) This can be dealt with by either injecting a little water into the fuel air mixture or increasing the nitrogen content of the air. I am not a chemist but I think that the nitrogen boost would be more efficient.
Thanks Roy J Stewart from Phoenix AZ, but I\'ll stick with my limited reality-based mindset thanks. Dreaming is fine but presenting your impossible dreams as fact in a press release is just asking for abuse and criticism. If harvesting hydrogen power from sea water was possible at a rate efficient enough to power a speedboat don\'t you think an energy company of government would have come up with it first? rather than a manufacturer of cheapo plastic boats who might (just might) be seeking a bit of attention.
Next week, a company that makes keyring bottle-openers will \'discover\' a metal that is lighter than air but 100x stronger than steel.
I love the comment \"Someone who didn\'t sleep through highschool physics class should know this with certainty,\" as well as the many similar ones. It\'s that kind of epic fail thinking that holds us back.
We know NOTHING. As soon as you think you know, you limit yourself. Keep in mind that every generation of so-called scientists and engineers think they \"know.\" In the next generation it\'s discovered that they didn\'t know after all and the so-called \"impossible\" has become achievable.
Even the so-called \"laws\" of physics only express our current understanding of physics. Make no mistake, we DON\'T know everything we think we know. If there were no creative, brilliant minds sprinkled throughout human history, we\'d still \"know\" we live on a flat world where the sky is held up by the mountains. Thank goodness there were creative minds willing to challenge what the \"knowing\" scientists of those days believed.
NEVER assume you KNOW anything at all. Anything you\'ve been taught as \"true\" is simply the most likely explanation at the time. ALWAYS assume that it\'s possible you\'re wrong. Anything else leads to failure.
I am not a scientist or engineer so I am not familiar with all the necessary equipment necessary to make this a real option. I was just wondering if this does work could the same equipment be used to power a car, truck, bus, or train? Couldn\'t some thing else other than water be used since I keep hearing that water will be in short supply soon maybe urine? I also wonder if the big oil companies would allow such a thing to make it to market since so much money is still being made from fossil fuel.
In the words of the Car Talk guys:
Seriously Gizmag, do you have to brainlessly copy every piece of marketing fluff, no matter how transparent the scam?
There\'s really only two ways to make this work in the real word: (1) It\'s an electrical boat, and for some reason they prefer to waste a lot of energy by first producing hydrogen and then burning it, instead of just using an electrical motor (which are very efficient). Seems unlikely, given the weight of the boat. Or (2) They\'re using a regular gasoline motor, and injecting some hydrogen. Unlikely to give any advantage in energy efficiency whatsoever, but it may give them enough of a marketing edge among the credulous rich snobs. I\'d put my money on this one, since they seem to be referring to the old \"HHO\" scam on their blog: http://luxury.blog.fr/
I\'ll withhold judgement until they describe the hydrogen producing mechanism. The comments are right on the money, you can\'t get energy for nothing, 1st Law of Thermodynamics.
It\'s absolutely ASTOUNDING to see how many people in the 21st century think perpetual motion machines are possible and there are hundreds of YouTube videos showing people \"refining\" machines with magnets and claiming \"we\'re almost there\".
What\'s going on with the education systems out there?
Since I\'m one of the relatively few people who have converted an engine to run on hydrogen, I\'ll enter the debate. H2 ignites so easily that you have to keep the mixture very lean to prevent backfiring. Because of this, NOx emissions are impossible to eliminate (although less of it is produced when running on H2 than is produced when running on hydrocarbon fuel). What someone said about using up all of the O2 preventing NOx emissions is BS: NOx is still produced, along with unburned hydrocarbons when you use all of the O2). Speaking of hydrocarbons, some of these (along with CO and CO2) are produced because some of the lubricating oil is burned off the cylinder walls during combustion in H2 engines.
If the \"generator\" uses sacrificial metals, then the energy embedded in the metal will have caused far more pollution than burning fossil fuel directly! If they claim to use electrolysis (powered by a generator on the engine) then it\'s a hoax because it would break the laws of thermodynamics. Besides, an electrolysis hydrogen generator big enough to keep up with such a large engine would be bigger than the boat, so it simply won\'t fit in there!
Personally, as a professional engineer with experience in hydrogen fuelled internal combustion engines, I\'m putting up a BS alert!
Looks good in black... Does it also come in Brown to match the complete load of BS that it is?
To many clever greenies out there these days for these type of claims to stand unchallenged. Any clueless cashed up buyers that still exist will no doubt do a bit of web due dilligence at a minimum... what will they uncover? 100 negative posts.
Bad marketing decision MIG!
There is a possibility that while parked in harbour the generator is powered by mains which does the main work, and while out at sea, solar panels do some, thus the manufacturers claims can be warranted. Also there could be high density lithium batteries doing some work on the motors while maintaining the hydrogen facility. But welcome to the future. Today we have invisible stealth fighters and high performance consumer cars, these too are actually miracles which we don\'t realise. One day harnessing solar power could be 80 percent efficient, this will another new age right in front of us.
Is this for real?
Joe Servino PE
I have a religion for anyone that believes any of this is possible.
If MIG needs help...
I am a designer builder and user of water as a fuel source.
I designed out problems of seawater and made it produce HHO. I would like to design a quick \"RO\" system to clean the water up from all live elements in seawater.
As for producing the power to make on demand fuel from water it is possible.
How? It is for me to know and you to pay for one day. I see one comment here that someone would like to buy the boat for the Hydrogen system. Good luck with that.
I saw many comments saying it is a lie and other colorful comments. To all those comments I say, ha ha. I designed a submarine and a boat the could go around the world without bringing any fuel for the engines. The boat could be 100% water as a fuel if the investor is wealthy enough. I am very happy to see this story and I worry for the MIG team that once out is will be dissected and sold without any more benefits from there work. As that is my worry, years and years of work and someone comes along and spends a fraction of the time and money I have invested in my education and work and it is in walmart the next year. Why don\'t I market it, It takes money to make money. Anyway good luck MIG team, I\'ll try to get my project funded next year, again so see you in the papers. Or not as I may use a publicist as a security measure. My designs would make power company\'s change there view of there business over night. Make steam? Coal fire power and nu clear power is steam. So, 100% green clean and Abundant energy... The time to do this stuff is now and we few can do it.
Hello kinney473847347, I doubt you can properly design and build an engine that uses water as fuel, since you are not even capable of properly using the English language and the keyboard.
\"It is for me to know and you to pay for one day\" Yeah right... funny thing about these HHO nonsense is that it\'s been \'out there\' for more than 10 years but not a single working prototype of it in the real world. I guess Big Oil has stolen/destroyed/bought out/erased all traces of these wonderful machines and kidnapped everyone involved...
I\'m 12 and know this is fake. Watch Disney\'s Cars 2. In the end the alternative energy was fake, and so is this one.
I like Dave Andrews\' comment!
We TOO EASILY Limit ourselves with closed minds!
The biggest \'over-sight in thinking\' is that this would be a \"Zero-Energy\" process! It would NOT! There is STORED ENERGY IN the Hydrogen! This is NOT a \'perpetual motion\' device! Without NEW hydrogen from the surrounding sea-water the vessel WOULD deplete... Think of it more from a perspective of a boat riding around in a \'sea\' of diesel fuel! You \'scoop up\' a measure of the diesel fuel, break it down so you separate out the gasoline, and burn it in your engine. You return the exhausted gases to the surrounding \'sea\'... NOT a \"zero-balance\" of energy use... BUT Diesel Fuel is NOT 80% of the Earth\'s Surface! Nor is it FREE and readily available! (I would expect this boat would work even BETTER in FRESH water! Less \'un-usable bi-products\' to filter and/or separate!)
I do not claim to know enough about hydrogen engines to say I know how this would work, nor how fast the hydrogen could be \'separated\' from the water. But I DO understand the fueling process, and the fact that this WOULD be almost an endless supply for such a boat. MY questions would focus on how FAST the process would be. Could it process a flow of water fast enough to do it during operation, or would it require \'down time\' to process and store a given volume of fuel, and to recharge batteries for on-board processes and equipment? Would you be able to \"turbocharge\" the engine with STRAIGHT Water injected above a certain operating temp and/or pressure?(Just as water is injected in high-powered turbo gas engines, and along with many Nitrous injection systems, and the heat and pressure causes release of the oxygen?)
BTW-- to \"SpaceBagels\" -- There ARE \'successful\' Hydrogen engines IN PRODUCTION! Just check out some of the links from right here on Gizmag! BMW, Honda, Mazda, and even a motorscooter!
Think more about how we CAN do new things! Rather than why we CAN\'T!! (o;
I'm not ready to pull the trigger just yet. I'm waiting for the cold fusion powered, hydrofoil/pontoon yacht due out next spring.