Electricity + gasoline = more mpg?
Kids, do not try this at home. Researchers at Temple University have been experimenting with what happens when an electric current is run through fuel. Big boom, right? Well, apparently not.
According to a paper the Temple team has published in "Energy & Fuels", done right, a small electric current applied to fuel just before it enters the combustion chamber, makes for much smaller droplets of fuel which burn cleaner and more efficiently. The team installed and tested their device on a diesel Mercedes where it showed a 20% decrease in fuel consumption in the lab.
The technology is currently being tested on a fleet of diesel trucks in Pennsylvania. How soon might you see it on a car lot? Actually you may see it on a late-night informercial first.
The company will most likely bring the tech to market is the same one running the Pennsylvania test: Save The World Air, Inc. That's the same company that sells the MagChargR which is basically a magnet that supposedly does the same thing this new technology does. It's also the same company that at one time was selling the Zero Emission Fuel Saver (ZEFS) device which was basically a magnet that, um, did the same thing. The RAND Corporation looked into ZEFS and found "at best mixed results." STWA is also the company that was sued by the SEC for stock fraud.
So, maybe they've got something that works this time around, maybe not. The science sounds solid, but only time will tell if it translates into a working product.
[Source: Gizmag]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
ShaamanRyu 8:40AM (10/15/2008)
wow...reread the second last paragraph..it's VERY confusing...
Reply
Randy 1:26PM (10/15/2008)
It's kinda pointless to even write that last paragraph! It's like "could work, could not, might work, but time will tell"
Also, pardon my absolute ignorance of this "new technology" but um..... doesn't a spark plug provide an electrical current to gasoline so that it explodes in the cylinder? I mean, wouldn't over gapping your plugs give you more electricity? Or are they doing a sort of low constant current? Scratching head!
If they are doing that, I agree, late night commercials will be where it's sold because it will probably void all warranties upon use until of course Detroit tests them and puts then makes them SE (standard equipment)
Thoughts?
Kotse 1:38PM (10/15/2008)
"That's the same company that sells the MagChargR which is basically a magnet that supposedly does the same thing this new technology does. It's also the same company that at one time was selling the Zero Emission Fuel Saver (ZEFS) device which was basically a magnet that, um, did the same thing..."
This product is nothing but a..."magnet" for your money.
Menice 8:46AM (10/15/2008)
how about the Vortec Cyclone infomercial? 40bucks for a pc of bent tin....what a pos.
i wonder if this has any merit? kind of odd, like if it spazzed out and sent too much current through.... it'd blow up .
Reply
TheRedMonkey 12:29PM (10/15/2008)
It says they are working with diesel. It does not go boom like regular petrol does, its not nearly as flamable under regular pressure.
Phil L. 9:05AM (10/15/2008)
Wait a minute: The title talks about gasoline, but then the testing is done with diesel? We quickly transition to magnets, and move right on to stock fraud.
Smells like snake oil.
Reply
Geeky1 9:19AM (10/15/2008)
Assuming that this works, I'm not sure testing it on an OM603 engine is necessarily the most valid test in the world.
I mean, it's a great engine, and I love my 300D, but that engine was introduced in 1984. It's not the most modern diesel in the world. It uses the old piston type of injection pump with injectors that open when a predetermined pressure (set by a spring in the injector assembly) is reached. I'm sure that a newer common rail system running MUCH higher pressures would achieve much better fuel atomization without their device than the 603 does, especially so if they tested it on a car with 200,000+ miles (which most 300Ds like the one pictured have). Most of these diesel Mercedes are high mileage cars now, a lot of which haven't been maintained very well since they transitioned from "used Mercedes" status to "just another old car" and they're likely to have worn injectors, a worn timing chain and injection pump drive chain, etc.
I'm not convinced that any improvement seen on a very old (technologically speaking, at least), probably somewhat worn diesel engine is going to translate to a modern, common rail diesel or gasoline engine.
Reply
Allan 9:36AM (10/15/2008)
Countdown until someone tries this themselves with a little too much current starts...... now.
Reply
nataku83 9:47AM (10/15/2008)
Yeah...they always test these things on the oldest, least advanced engine they can get away with because, assuming there was any merit to the invention whatsoever, that's they only way they could really show any positive results. Modern cars have very efficient combustion! You could probably improve it a little, but not enough to show any significant fuel economy improvement.
Reply
Steve 9:48AM (10/15/2008)
Is this what a spark plug does?
Reply
Allan 10:11AM (10/15/2008)
Don't think so... My understanding is that the spark plug ignites the fuel (in non diesel, anyway)... This system would be passing current through the fuel before the combustion chamber.
Joe K. 10:05AM (10/15/2008)
"The technology is currently being tested on a fleet of diesel trucks in Pennsylvania."
Pun intended?
Reply
wrxtotoro 10:15AM (10/15/2008)
The science works for ionizable liquids. We have a similar techniques in electro-spray ionization mass spectrometry in which ~3-5kV is applied to the tip of the hollow needle and makes the stream of liquid spray into fine droplets for solvent evaporation.
But I am not really sure how useful/relevant this technique is to gasoline/diesel in the engine.
Reply
TJ 10:46AM (10/15/2008)
You guys can have your electric current and magnets and vortecs. I am going to stick with the magic pixie dust, I know it works.
Efficiency is engineered and built. Durability is planned. Anyone thinking about spending money on this stuff, send the check to me along with a phone number, I will call you and give you a class on money management, logic, logistics, and common sense.
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 11:01AM (10/15/2008)
Snake oil.
Science is dead.
Reply
BoxerFanatic 11:21AM (10/15/2008)
Ok...
If you can't tell me in three sentences or less, what happens to the fuel, chemically, when electricity is passed through it, that affects how energy dense that it is...
I call Shenanigans!!!!
Smaller droplets don't raise efficiency, only mixing and burn rate, MAYBE. The potential energy content is unchanged, unless you can explain to me how it is improved by an electric current.
Reply
okapi 11:53AM (10/15/2008)
in as far as i can tell from my quick read(but apparently longer than autoblog's) of the publication referenced by autoblog there is no significant effect on droplet diameter by an electric field applied to regular gasoline, only diesel.
Reply
Stumpy 12:27PM (10/15/2008)
1.21 gigawatts!
Reply
Craig Hartman 12:54PM (10/15/2008)
Not going to comment on the efficacy, but the post leads to to think that this is dangerous. Notice they used diesel, not regular gasoline. Mythbusters did an episode where they were trying to outrun a trail of lit gasoline on the ground like in the movies. Well, they used gas, diesel, and jet fuel. They couldn't even ignite the diesl or the jet fule. Regular gas is much more flammable.
Reply
Frylock350 1:43PM (10/15/2008)
No in this case electricity + gasoline = snake oil
Reply