If humans could eventially control the weather, would we want government in charge of it?

P. Wilson, Hattiesburg, MS,

This thing isn't powered by tap water; it's powered by a rechargable battery. Rechargable, as in charged by electricity generated at some power plant. I wonder how many pounds of coal go up the stack to make this thing run around for a few minutes...

Those darned laws of physics always seem to get in the way of some miracle answer to our energy problems.

Mark, Billings, MT, USA

I and everyone I know will buy an affordable electric car that runs on hydrogen produced on demand from a tap-water holding tank - the hydrogen then being converted to electricity via a fuel cell. Great advances are being made each day.

The Hydrocar on Amazon requires no external electrical (battery) imput. This is where this technology is going. 3/4 of the earth's surface is water. It falls from the sky. There's a thing under the feet of most people called the water table.

Those who prefer expensive and dirty internal combustion engines running on monopoly controlled petroleum products / compressed hydrogen or natural gas are free to remain in the 19th century and under corporate control as long as you want. Ain't freedom great!

David Sadler, Du Quoin, USA / IL

This thing is a shell game. The heart of the device is the "miniaturised (sic) unit powered by a rechargeable battery." Since the by-product of the hydrogen fuel cell is water, it would seem to be perpetual motion, but alas, no process is 100% efficient (2nd Law of Thermodynamics - Entropy.) It therefore takes more total energy to separate the water than the amount of energy derived from putting it back together. That extra energy comes from the hydroelectric plant or the nuclear power plant in your area. The car may not pollute, but somewhere there is somebody muddying up the air or impacting the environment somehow, and in direct proportion to the energy you save and the pollutants you don't emit.

Sunny Jim, El Paso de Robles, California

Will there be odd, even days on adding water to play with your car in a time of water rationing. maybe there should also be an environmental impact study of the use of these toys.

Conny Lyngus, walnut , ca usa

This ‘run vehicles’ off H2 idea is not so far fetched...they've found that using a catalyst of Gallium and Aluminum the H2 comes off at the source (water) at a very low cost ratio...much smaller ratios than producing regular fuel, bio carbons, hydrogen cells or even solar...coming off at source means there is no need for storage of the H2 (which is one of the more expensive and cumbersome components of hydrogen technology)… in addition it’s very easy to convert most internal combustion engines to burn H2….without the storage component issue and the low conversion ratio, it’s quite feasible...that is if this technology (aluminum and gallium catalyst or similar) was tweaked it could easily push us to a H2 age…

Mike

mike, ft myers, Fl

I heard about this when I was growing up back in the 1940' and 50's. My father told me it had been invented to use for cars back then but was bought ou by the oil companys. So now they dicover it again? I think money buys out ideas that can save people money and would help our enviorment. We'll never see it happen because the rich and powerful won't ler it happen>.
Bill

Bill Hoard, Salem, Oregon

Let's put a bit of reality into this system. We use a battery to dissociate water into O2 and H. We run the gasses through a fuel cell and generate electricity. We power the car from that electricity. Does no one see the absurdity of this? The system would be more efficient if we ran the motor directly off the battery to say nothing of the value of saving the weight and space of the water reservoir, the dissociation chamber, and the fuel cell. Where I live, we could just use the solar cells to run the car all day. You can not get something for nothing. Transforming water to gas and gas to electricity in not a 100% matter. There are losses. If you were to extract the gasses separately from the vehicle, compress them, and use that to operate the fuel cell in the vehicle, you might so better than using a large battery in a car. You still have to provide the electricity for this. I suspect the range you would have from a manageable H2 tank would be very limited.

Stuart Scott, Fountain Hills, Arizona, USA

Don't worry Selrach Rantop, I'm sure they would still find a way to convince you that their own "special" water that is 10x the cost of tap water is far superior as a fuel meaning you will still be forced to head for the pumps ;)

jafar, paris, france

Let's hope water doesn't become scarce!

Andrew Taylor, London, UK

A solar powered car running on this tech would be nice, but then the Corporate Overlords wouldn't have us slaving to put money in the Pump, now would they?

THAT's why you don't have the Tech, the Free Energy Tech available only to the super rich.

Don't support the Corporatocracy.

Selrach Rantop. , Scranton , Penn

I think Dominic Pearson was being sarcastic. You all took the bait. Unlucky.

Tommy , London,

There is no such thing as a "greenhouse gas". Greenhouses work by interrupting convection, there are no gases that can interrupt convection in the open atmosphere. The climate change we need to really be wary of is weather modification. All of Earth's weather systems are driven by electricity. Direct control of Earth's weather would result in a lot of waste heat, increasing the temperature of the planet slightly. Carbon dioxide is a red herring, it's a convenient marker to measure energy use in "industrial" and preindustrial nations. Carbon regimes have one purpose; to keep the poor poorer.

Codie Vickers, Marion, IL

there systems today that do away with the cell and extract hydrogen directly from the water on the fly.

David, mtl, Canada

That's just great, we will have "TOY'S" that run on hydrogen before we see car makers produce the real thing_go figure.

Lou, Parsonsfield, Maine / USA

Dominic is right, water vapour is a greenhouse gas however when he says "think clouds", he is incorrect as clouds are condensed water vapour, or liquid water as many would call it.

Anyway, that sidetracked me from the point that yes water vapour is a greenhouse gas but it will do no harm whatsoever, the atmosphere can only hold a certain amount of water (max. 4% I think), meaning it doesn't build up in the atmoshpere, so any water vapour that is emitted will usually be back on the ground within 8 days, plus youre not creating any more water than was there in the first place so theres no problem.

Mr Pearson I accuse you of seeding panic and fear for no good reason.

Charles Hannigan, Wallingford,

Isn't water in a perpetual closed circuit?

It evaporates, it forms clouds, it rains, it forms lakes, it evaporates, it forms clouds, it rains, it forms lakes, it evaporates, it forms clouds, it rains, it forms lakes, it evaporates, it forms clouds, it rains, it forms lakes, it evaporates, it forms clouds, it rains, it forms lakes, it evaporates, it forms clouds, it rains, it forms lakes, it evaporates.

R Bingham, Lauzun, France

water vapout would saturate the atmosphere and condense out. its saturation is a funciton of temperature too. its effect cannot influence climate change as it does not build up in the atmosphere either.

John D, Houston, USA

Dominic Peason, London. Sorry, 'water vapour is a much more serious greenhouse gas (think clouds)'. Water vapour is what it says, water. The same stuff we drink and which surrounds this sceptered isle (albeit with a few impurities). Without clouds, we'd have damn all water to drink, how do you think the water gets into the lakes and rivers? Now methane, that is a dangerous greenhouse gas, but that is derived mainly from the digestion and conversion of vegetable matter, not by burning hydrogen.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

If the electrical current used to separate hydrogen and oxygen was produced by nuclear/renewable power, then it would be zero emission.

However, I presume it "exhausts" water vapour as a by product?

Water vapour is a much much much more serious greenhouse gas than CO2 (think clouds).

Dominic Pearson, London, UK

I feel compelled to point out that Hydrogen power could indeed be the way to power the future. The hydrogen does turn in to water when burnt in the presence of oxygen although many manufacturers are developing methane seperating as th best method. Since this is a very potent 'Green House Gas', much more so than Carbon Dioxide, we could flood the world ourselves instead of melting the polar ice caps to create our swimming pools.

Alistair Kipling, Birmingham,

It's great to see this technology go mainstream but it's not the first h2 toy nor the cheapest.

An H2 toy racing car with solar recharger has been on sale online for over a year with the same features.

Just google "h racer" and you can find it for £59 at many online venders

Seamus, Dun-sur-Grandry,

Are batteries produced using zero emissions then? I suspect not!

Ian Bell, Adelaide, Australia

Ed Ward is completely correct, but I doubt anyone will take note of his comments.

The "Hydrogen Economy" is touted as a solution to global warming and shortages of conventional hydrocarbon fuels without addressing the basic question of where the hydrogen will be obtained from. School text books and science programmes highlight 'pure water' produced by the combustion of hydrogen in air as if there is no other aspect to be considered. It is all very depressing.

Iain Wallace, Bexley, Kent, U.K.

Surely this is not the first household item to use this technology. I feel certain that I saw a clock and a radio running with such fuel cells last year. One or the other was for sale in "Downtown" at Grantham and no doubt in other such stores.

Laurence George Hards, Surfleet, Lincolnshire

Clever - but what's the point? It's easy enough to produce hydrogen - simply pass an electric current through water and it reverts to its component elements of hydrogen and oxygen. Unfortunately, however, it takes more power to do this than is produced by burning the hydrogen.

Ed Ward, Bristol,

Surely this is not the first household item to use this technology. I feel certain that I saw a clock and a radio running with such fuel cells last year. One or the other was for sale in "Downtown" at Grantham and no doubt in other such stores.

Laurence George Hards, Surfleet, Spalding, Lincolnshire

Its a good job toy cars aren`t powered by petrol, the oil companies would have blown up Corgi.lol

Carl Jones, London, UK