• Aug 1, 2014
Imagine if a little bit of water could make your internal combustion engine run cleaner and more efficiently, and help it produce more oxygen than a tree. That's what the LeefH2 device is designed to help your motor do. HNO Green Fuels, the maker of the LeefH2, wants to turn your engine – and every other combustion engine – into an oxygen farm while reducing particulate matter and getting more power out of your fuel.

The LeefH2 is a relatively small device that attaches to an internal combustion engine. The larger, High Volume Unit (HVU) is 10 by 8.5 by 6.5 inches, while the smaller Low Volume Unit (LVU) is 9 by 6 by 5.5 inches. Most of the available literature focuses on cleaning up diesel engines, but the same technology can be applied to gasoline and jet engines, which have pollution problems of their own. The LeefH2 uses water to create hydrogen and oxygen. The oxygen gets dumped directly into the atmosphere, while the hydrogen gets piped into the combustion chamber (it's not stored). In the cylinder, the hydrogen, rather than being used as fuel itself, helps provide more complete combustion of the fuel, as it burns faster than the standard mixture of air and fuel. Not only does this make the engine more efficient (reducing fuel consumption), it also reduces the amount of particulate matter in the exhaust.

So far, in EPA-approved lab tests, the LeefH2 has been able to reduce the particulate emissions of smaller diesel engines by 49 percent, and larger diesel engines by 43 percent. HNO is confident that it could eventually refine the technology to decrease particulate matter by 70 to 90 percent. HNO projects that a single HVU LeefH2 device can produce, on average, 365 pounds of oxygen per year. That's more than the average tree, says HNO, which produces 260 pounds of oxygen per year.

Right now, HNO is running a crowdfunding campaign through Indiegogo to raise money for the LeefH2 project. Contributors at the highest level will receive a working prototype of the LVU LeefH2. You can learn more about the LeefH2 in the videos below, or get more details at HNO's website.




I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 36 Comments
      • 4 Months Ago
      pit(dot)fpinnovations(dot)ca/Pages/News/hydrogen-Injection-myths-and-facts(dot)aspx "The study also shows a correlation between an increase in the rate of hydrogen injection and a reduction in the peak pressure inside the cylinder along with reduced engine output under engine load test. For systems with onboard hydrogen generators, one of the problems is the efficiency of the process: burning hydrogen creates insufficient energy to reach the energy threshold for producing the gas. Another potential hurdle is that today’s vehicles and engines are extremely complex machines that need to be carefully adjusted to meet stringent emissions standards: injecting another gas into the engine intake could conflict with the engine’s initial settings. Therefore, the engine control unit could consider the fuel-air mixture too weak and increase the amount of fuel injected, which would cancel the possible positive potential effects of hydrogen injection."
        • 4 Months Ago
        Yes..you are very right (for the most part, but not totally). There is definitely a limit to the amount of hydrogen you can produce with an onboard hydrogen generator, particularly with gasoline engine. If you produce too much, the alternator works too hard and you can negate the gains that the hydrogen can give you. The alternators for most automobiles are designed to handle the electrical needs of what's built into the vehicle...not much more. So there is definitely a limit to the hydrogen production. Most people think "the more hydrogen the better", but that is not the case. When you have a system drawing an extra 30 or 40 amps from the alternator, you will definitely not see fuel economy gains. Also, typical hydrogen generators produce HHO gas, which allow the oxygen (along with the hydrogen) to enter the fuel-air mixture. For example, as you mentioned, the ECU monitors Oxygen sensors (sometimes as many as three or more) to determine the amount of fuel to be injected into the cylinders. When this extra oxygen is detected, more fuel is added, which also negates the gains of the hydrogen. That is why in the HHO world, they actually develop devices to "fool" the ECU into not considering the extra oxygen. They are called EFIE (Electronic Fuel Injection Enhancer). With this system, from what I understand, only the hydrogen enters the combustion chamber...there are no sensor for detecting extra hydrogen, even in gasoline engines, even though gasoline engines do not appear to be the focus. So the Oxygen, which could cause some issues with the O2 sensors, is not present...therefore NO issues with extra oxygen...it was release to the atmosphere.....and not introduced to the combustion chamber. Also, this device seems to be focused on diesel engines and particulate matter reduction....not fuel economy with gasoline engines. In studies going back into the 70's, hydrogen (and hydrogen alone) was shown to speed up the "Laminar Flame Speed" of hydrocarbon based fuel.....and as it did, it improved the combustion of the fuel....and lowered emissions. Up to now, the only know way to introduce hydrogen was with electrolysis and HHO. Hydrogen tanks were really never an option. Unfortunately, even though HHO has its benefits, if used properly, it also has its problems, mostly with easy of use and installation. It looks like some of those issues are avoided with this system.....and it looks like they are not trying to make some of the somewhat exaggerated (and hard to prove) claims and benefits of fuel economy that HHO systems seem to be doing for gasoline engines.
      DaveMart
      • 4 Months Ago
      Good news, as due to their very favourable power to weight ratio diesel trucks at least will be with us for decades to come, and PHEVs with an ICE will also be with us for a long time to come, and this will at any rate to a degree reduce the toxic impact of their exhausts on long runs.
      Jesse Gurr
      • 4 Months Ago
      If this does what they say it does, then get these on those bunker oil burning ships quick!
      Marco Polo
      • 4 Months Ago
      Hmmmm.... I'm always sceptical of the value such devices. I'm even more cynical about the claims of small underfunded organizations seeking money from the public, for a product, which if it showed real promise, would easily attract professional funding. Now, I'm not saying that HNO is a deliberate scam, or whether the product works, or doesn't work. That can only be determined by a long process of engineering testing, and independent analysis. If it works in the way it's promoters claim, then it's obviously a great advance in environmental technology, and since it can be retro-fitted to existing diesel engines, has great potential to improve road transport pollution. If that's the case, and the guys at HNO are genuine and sincere, I hope they will forgive me for being baffled as to why the haven't applied to the US DOE, or any VC tech funder. The US DOE, along with many other governments, and universities, have very generous programs of grants and loans for just this purpose ? I'm sure that most US (and foreign) diesel manufacturers, forced to comply with increasingly strict environmental regulations, would be only too happy to support such promising technology. These companies have not only, engineers who could understand the technology, but appropriate experience and testing facilities capable of evaluating the products value and feasibility.
        • 4 Months Ago
        @Marco Polo
        To your response below. It is not an extravagant claim. There is EPA testing documentation that made the claim sir. Do you think for a moment they would say such a thing without documentation. Would you? I understand the comments made on this blog. But they are made in ignorance. I am not questioning peoples intelligences. But they make them without taking into account this may just may be real. As you may have figured out. I am a fan. And happen to know a more than you do about it. Just saying.
          Marco Polo
          • 4 Months Ago
          @ broderick.bellow As I said, I'm open minded, but would be far less sceptical if HNO were not asking for funding from 'unsophisticated' investors. Sadly Broderick, it's not exactly unknown for hopeful ah,...entrepreneurs, to make claims without any foundation whatsoever ! The EPA tests alone, are not sufficient to judge the merits of the product. Before HNO seeks money from investors, they should have completed a proper feasibility study of the product, including independent analysis with some sort of due diligence. When it's your own money you're risking, I say go for it ! Back you own judgement, forget being cautious, and forge ahead.But when you ask others, especially the general public, to invest, then you must do everything in your power to ensure that every safeguard has been undertaken. But, I repeat, if the product is so creditable, why haven't HNO applied for funding to the DOE ? Why not ask an organisation with experts experienced and able to assess the value and potential of the product for funding, why go instead to the unqualified general public ?
      • 4 Months Ago
      Has anyone noticed that they are not talking about fuel economy in gasoline engines, but instead particulate matter in diesel engines? And for those that are interested, look up hydrogen and "Laminar Flame Speed". Very small amounts of hydrogen is required to speed up the flame speed and combustion rate of hydrocarbon based fuels. This is not a new concept, its been proven over and over again, by multiple scientific entities. Very....Very...Very little hydrogen is needed to increase the flame speed. So the calculation by the gentleman below is correct...except he calculated too much hydrogen per mile for what ever that calculation was for. The actual percentage to fuel is much less....much less....Surprise!
        Jesse Gurr
        • 4 Months Ago
        If you listen to the middle video, he does talk about how it improves fuel efficiency. Also, on their website it says, "To Improve combustion efficiency and improve fuel economy." Doesn't say it is just for diesels, they say all combustion engines.
      • 4 Months Ago
      Mattguyver Anyone want to fund my solar flashlight project? No batteries needed, just light. Almost got it perfected, need investors and a government grant!
      PeterScott
      • 4 Months Ago
      Sorry but we have already seen the Hydrogen Electrolysis scam. It has been tested and debunked on the efficiency side. I doubt they will generate enough hydogen to change emissions very much, especially in the light of lost efficiency.
        DaveMart
        • 4 Months Ago
        @PeterScott
        Its not being used for power, but to alter the combustion characteristics to make it burn cleaner. That does not sound any less likely than the addition of urine which is what is used at present.
          PeterScott
          • 4 Months Ago
          @DaveMart
          The difference is, that adding urea doesn't put additional load on the engine. Generating onboard hydrogen does. These systems end causing MORE hydrocarbons to end up being burned. Resulting in MORE CO2 production.
          PeterScott
          • 4 Months Ago
          @DaveMart
          If H2 injection is really beneficial, it woudl probably make sense to have an H2 tank, since the efficiency of small electrolyzers isn't very good, and you are using a Diesel engine to power it. Or you could just have a tank of Natural Gas for injection and probably get similar results. Or even better, just run on Natural Gas instead of Diesel.
          DaveMart
          • 4 Months Ago
          @DaveMart
          Dunno. I would have to find out much more about this technology than my interest in it dictates to form a solid opinion.
          DaveMart
          • 4 Months Ago
          @DaveMart
          @SteveG: I think people knew what I meant, although of course I turned the phrase for effect.
          SteveG
          • 4 Months Ago
          @DaveMart
          Urea, not urine.
        Tim W.
        • 4 Months Ago
        @PeterScott
        I suppose the difference between this and other 'onboard hho generator' scams, is that they aren't dumping the oxygen into the combustion chamber as well, meaning you don't get water in your exhaust system, so it *could* have some merit. It will probably reduce fuel economy overall (extra load on the alternator) but fuel economy isn't the goal, cleaner exhaust is.
        jimmy_james44
        • 4 Months Ago
        @PeterScott
        So far, in EPA-approved lab tests, the LeefH2 has been able to reduce the particulate emissions of smaller diesel engines by 49 percent, and larger diesel engines by 43 percent. HNO is confident that it could eventually refine the technology to decrease particulate matter by 70 to 90 percent. HNO projects that a single HVU LeefH2 device can produce, on average, 365 pounds of oxygen per year. That's more than the average tree, says HNO, which produces 260 pounds of oxygen per year. I believe the EPA hires real scientists.
      Levine Levine
      • 4 Months Ago
      Shame on AutoblogGreen for giving publicity to a scam.
        Joeviocoe
        • 4 Months Ago
        @Levine Levine
        Autoblog has no shame.... remember this scam? http://green.autoblog.com/2009/10/06/altcar-2009-ef9s-unlimited-clean-energy-turbine-could-go-int/
        • 4 Months Ago
        @Levine Levine
        Levine. Explain to me how you know this is a scam. Only a fool will judge a thing before they know all the facts. Even the Bible says( Judge nothing before the time).You no nothing about this company or it's CEO. You know nothing about the EPA test that was done or it's findings. You no nothing about the reason the company is going the route it is taking for funding. You know nothing about how this project has advanced to where it is now. And yes to all the nay Sayers the test are EPA tested. with very good results. You obviously don't know the difference from HNO or HHO. There is a difference you know. Maybe you were scammed. But if innovators listen to people like you, we would still be riding horse and buggy's. FYI. Someone was always the first with a breakthrough with something that has never been done before.Think before you spew your negative poison. Do some research.
          Marco Polo
          • 4 Months Ago
          @ broderick.bellow You are quite right. Every innovation should be assessed purely on known facts and established viability. However, a little scepticism about extravagant claims touted by small, independent entrepreneurs, is also justified. I agree it's important to keep an open mind to both the possibility that this may be an important new automotive boon, or just another failed project. (or even a deliberate scam)
      • 4 Months Ago
      Geeze.....is it really THAT difficult to understand. Or did some of you NOT red the article. The O2 goes directly into the atmosphere from the device. The H2 goes into the combustion chamber to react with the existing fuel to speed up the combustion.....(that's what hydrogen does....and very little of it is required to do so)......enough so that more fuel is burned in the combustion chamber.....particulate matter (apparently most people don't know, is UNBURNT fuel in the combustion chamber). The more fuel is burnt, the less particulate matter formation. Diesel engines, although very efficient under load, are horribly inefficient at idle..which is when a disproportionately amount of unburned fuel is created. The hydrogen helps for more complete combustion...In the combustion chamber. I know its tough....but see if that can be absorbed in the brains...
      • 4 Months Ago
      So you take some water, split it into H and O2, inject the H into the "combustion chamber" where it reacts with the O2 in the chamber and turns into. Didn't create any oxygen. One could be hopeful of their claims of reducing particulate material but if they start off with a false claim about creating oxygen, makes you wonder.
      • 4 Months Ago
      Hey King, What Up?
      Cavaron
      • 4 Months Ago
      What kind of joke is this? Ok, it creates hydrogen through... I guess electrolysis out of water? Where does the energy for that come from? The 12V car battery, which is just a buffer for power from the motor. So in the end you will use MORE energy/fuel to run this device. Secondly I doubt, that a little bit of hydrogen can clean up the combustion process that much. How much hydrogen does it create per minute? They say 365 pounds of oxygen a year, I suppose thats over something like 15.000 miles driven per year. That would mean 730 pounds of hydrogen (because water is H2 O). Thats 0.05 pound of hydrogen per mile. Does anyone know, how much combustions a 4cylinder has over a distance of one mile? Divide the 0.05 pounds with it and you end up with... well, very very vew hydrogen...
        ABG fan from .fi
        • 4 Months Ago
        @Cavaron
        O is 16 times heavier than H. So that H2 would weight: 2*365/16 = 45 (pounds). That would mean 400 pounds (200kg) of water. I don't know how to calculate electrolysis, but it sounds like it requires full alternator power for... a few months? Probably a joke - yes. Not funny. (I did not read the article)
          Cavaron
          • 4 Months Ago
          @ABG fan from .fi
          You are right, I totally forgot to calculate atomic weight!
          Levine Levine
          • 4 Months Ago
          @ABG fan from .fi
          ABG fan from .fi The electrolysis of water is 64kcal/mole or 64kcal/18grams. 64kcal *200,000 grams (from your calculation) / 18 grams = 711,111kcal or 711,111,000 calorie required to produce the alleged 365lbs of O and 45 lbs of H.
        Ryan
        • 4 Months Ago
        @Cavaron
        Much easier to use the electricity or have a tank of H2 if it is that good. H2 that can be generated by excess wind power.
    • Load More Comments