Water cars a good idea?

[NorCalRacer]

OK, I.ve been hearing alot about vehicles that run on water lately.
From what I understand, these vehicles break apart a water molecule and then re-fuse it together for propulsion at the cost of a slight amount of water. I think this could be a terrible idea. Water is a non-renewable resource. It is much more important than oil, plastic or propane. We have already started damaging our worlds water supply with chemicals such as MTBE and others that stay through the hydrologic cycle and never leave the water.
If we start consuming the world's water supply at anywhere near the rate we consume oil we could probably screw up the planet pretty fast. I am wondering if anyone else has thought about this?

[underpowered]

water is a very renewable resource. believe ti or not, your gasoline car makes water. ever seen a car driving around town with water dripping from the tail pipe? that is because water is a by product of combustion. gasoline, and many other combustables, (household flour, propane, most flamable stuff) are hydrocarbons. a mixture of hydrogen and carbon molecules. well when these are mixed with oxygen and ignited they creat byproducts since nothing ever goes away, but rather changes form. two of these byproducts are H2O and CO. water will always be around and is a renewable resource. if a car runs on water, it will make water as well, just most likely in an evaporated form.

[400exrules]

isnt water like the properties of energy and matter? it is never created nor destroyed

[Ralph]

Originally posted by 400exrules
isnt water like the properties of energy and matter? it is never created nor destroyed

no matter can be created or destroyed.

As for water powerd vehicles. The exhaust of those vehicles would be prefectly clean water.

[TheFontMaster]

Originally posted by Ralph
no matter can be created or destroyed.


If it can't be created how did it get here?

[A A R O N]

Originally posted by TheFontMaster
If it can't be created how did it get here?


The big man upstairs. :cool:

[RaptorRacer45]

Originally posted by A A R O N
The big man upstairs. :cool:

Im willing to agree with that:D

[Fred55]

what you described is a Hyrdrogen fuel cell.....it takes what makes up water, Hydrogen and oxygen, and fuses them...this releases a electrical charge which then can be used to power electric motors....unforn. it takes a great deal of energy, more than what is made, to get hyrdrogen alone in order to put in a fuel cell.

[Johnny & Monica]

Did you guys see that on fox news or the link to it the guy got a 100 miles to 4 oz`s of water :) In a escort wagon :eek2:

[ELewandowski]

Bring on the water cars. Who cares if its not renewable. We have a buttload of it:D . And gas is killing me and my 2500 Van:ermm: . The only people who should be complaing is the oil companies.

[NorCalRacer]

OK, water can be replaced but can it be done with any form of efficiency? I am not arguing or a scientist just trying to gain insight. And if gas is too much don't drive a 3/4 ton van:D

[underpowered]

Originally posted by NorCalRacer
OK, water can be replaced but can it be done with any form of efficiency? I am not arguing or a scientist just trying to gain insight. And if gas is too much don't drive a 3/4 ton van:D

like we said, no matter can be reated nor destroyed. if a car runs on water, H2O, you will break the molecules apart into hydrogen and oxygen to be combusted. once combusted, it will simply go into vapor form and eventually back to water. teh only emsions from a water car will in fact be water, most likely in the form of steam. simple chemistry as to how they work and produce emisions.

[NorCalRacer]

I always thought in physics there was a slight loss in all reactions. It has been a long time since I took a class, but I was led to believe that there were no absolute laws and real life conversions always exhibited a small loss. I am probably wrong and always like learning something new, so please correct me.

[underpowered]

Originally posted by NorCalRacer
I always thought in physics there was a slight loss in all reactions. It has been a long time since I took a class, but I was led to believe that there were no absolute laws and real life conversions always exhibited a small loss. I am probably wrong and always like learning something new, so please correct me.

sounds like you are talkin about something else. newtons 3rd law of motion(i think, been a while since HS) says for every actions there is an equal an opposite reaction. but in teh process not all energy is transfered due outside forces, like friction, gravity, ect. in chemistry, no matter is created nor destroyed, but sound to me like you are talking about newtons laws of motion.

[Warnerade]

your right norcal...their is only one energy source that we know of today that is 100% efficient, its anti-matter..wich their is no probable way of using that to power things becuase it will destroy anything it comes into contact with, including an engine.

Water power cars is a good idea, and if somehow they can mass produce them and make them efficient enough to where we cant deplete the water here on earth...i dont see any flaws.

[mxdave28]

Originally posted by NorCalRacer
I think this could be a terrible idea. Water is a non-renewable resource.


hehehehe it must not rain in your neck of the woods??:confused: come to the east coast we have enough water we could flood etheopia(sp) heck just remember New Orleans(sp) and right now New England.:D then again i could bottle up some in my back yard :grr:

[NorCalRacer]

I am familiar with the laws of motion and I am referring to the loss in all matter conversions which happens in real life experiments. Even though something may make sense on paper, usually it is not as efficient in real life and in ALL conversions something is lost. To my knowledge nuclear fission is the only exception. Once again I am not an expert.
Oh yeah, we get a ton of rain:D