|
Beware of  & Others
Beware of hydrogen innovations llc
Makers of the HydroGen 1000 and HydroGen 2000
Larry
Trowbridge, who has been a Hydrogen Boost customer for over two years
and decided to try a product from another company. Following is a report from Larry
about his experience.
My Experience With Hydrogen Innovations
by Larry Trowbridge
Back in July I purchased a hydrogen generator from
Hydrogen Innovations ( http://burnh2O.com
) for the purpose of testing their guaranteed 15% mileage boost claim.
I would like to say that the experience was frustrating at best. I will
say that the product arrived
relatively quickly and was in good shape. When the unit arrived,
there were no instructions included. Nor were there any papers included
stating the money back guarantee if the increase in mileage was less
than the advertised 15%. When I called the company to ask about
receiving instructions, I was told they would be sent later. They did
however tell me on the phone what I needed to know about installing the
unit. I can’t remember if I asked when I called about the instructions
or at a later time, but when I asked about getting the mileage
guarantee in writing they seemed somewhat evasive and stated that they
weren’t out to cheat anyone. I never did get the written guarantee.
This was when things seemed to take a turn for the worse. This all took
place in August.
Then,
in September, we started producing FEMA trailers at work for the
hurricane Katrina relief effort and I could see that I would no longer
have the time to install and test the unit due to the overtime we were
working. I tried to contact Hydrogen Innovations by phone when I got
home from work and received no answer. There wasn’t even an answering
machine. I wanted to ask them about getting a refund since I no longer
had the time to work on the project. I sent numerous emails and never
got any response. In fact, now that I think of it, I never got any
response to any of the emails I sent them. I would strongly recommend
that anyone considering purchase of a unit from Hydrogen Innovations to
proceed with extreme caution. I realize that they were under no
obligation to offer a refund but even if I had gotten the unit
installed I would have found it difficult if not impossible to get
technical advice or a refund if the unit had not performed as
advertised.
Larry Trowbridge
Following are copies of emails sent by Larry to
Hydrogen Innovations
Hi
Paul,
I
was wondering if you could send some information on your refund policy.
I don't want to sound skeptical before I even start testing the unit,
but with my past experience with things not working, I would just feel
better with the refund policy information. Thanks for your
understanding.
Larry
TrowbridgeFrom: "LARRY TROWBRIDGE" <larry631@verizon.net>
To: <parnett@burnh2o.com>
Subject: Hydrogen generator
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 22:50:32 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C5A5D9.922212C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
PS:
I will probably be calling Monday or Tuesday to get information on how
to use the electrolyte solution.
Hi Paul,
I need
to know the procedure for verifying the mileage increase from the unit.
Thanks.
Larry
Trowbridge
From:
"LARRY TROWBRIDGE" <larry631@verizon.net>
To: <parnett@burnh2o.com>
Subject: Hydrogen unit
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 16:47:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0086_01C5A994.B7059EE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
Hi Paul,
When
I purchased your unit I had a place in mind to install it. The space
was the right dimensions but, when I went to install the unit, there
wasn't enough room to maneuver it into the spot. Brent suggested I
relocate my battery to the trunk. I purchased a battery relocation kit
to do that. Since then I have been working overtime and haven't had
time to install everything. We are producing temporary housing units
for FEMA to be sent to the victims of Katrina. Would you consider
granting me a refund if I return the unit? I would of course absorb the
shipping costs. I would appreciate a quick response as the money was
borrowed from a friend. Thanks.
Larry
Trowbridge
From:
"LARRY TROWBRIDGE" <larry631@verizon.net>
To: <parnett@burnh2o.com>
Subject: Hydro-Gen return?
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:46:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_006F_01C5C842.5CDE5AC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
This last email was repeated on October 6, 10, 13,
15, 22, 31.
Fran’s Comments
I
recently visited the web site http://burnh2O.com
to see if the obvious misinformation that I pointed out to the company
a number of months ago had been corrected. It has not. I
will explain later.
First
I must say that if has been my experience, and that of most companies
and customers of on-board electrolyzers, that the addition of
electrolyzer gases alone into an internal combustion engine does not cause any major increases
in mileage on any vehicle, diesel or gasoline fueled.
I have had some of my
customers challenge certain companies about their 8%, 10%, and 15%
mileage gain “guarantees.”
One company said that the
customer doesn’t really purchase the unit but enters into an equipment
lease. The installation fee was
something like $700 and the equipment lease cost $150 per month. My customer asked the company
president what would happen if the device failed to produce the 10%
increase in mileage on his tractor-trailer. The response was that after three months of repeated
failure, the customer would be released from the equipment lease. The customer asked if he would be
refunded the $700 installation fee and the $450 rent on the equipment,
and the company president said that he could not do that because…..but
he guaranteed the unit would produce 10% increase. Well what kind of guarantee is it
when a customer is not refunded the money he wasted to try someone’s
guaranteed equipment?
Another company, who sold a
unit to one of my prospective customers, sold their unit to this
customer for something like $12,000.
They have replaced it twice and still the customer has achieved
no mileage gains. According to
that customer the company has a six month policy, you have to try for
six months before a refund can be given. I told that customer to start making his demands for a
refund long before the six month is expired and document the demand in
a number of ways, email, certified mail, recorded phone calls,
etc. I suspect that whatever
jurisdiction that company is in, has some case law that establishes a
six month limit that is such, that if no refund is demanded before six
month, then the customer must be satisfied with the equipment and
should not get a refund. The
company is in Canada and I am not familiar with their case law.
Of course none of this has
anything to do with  . We will now discuss the
misinformation on the web site www.burnh2o.com
because that is what I can point to at the moment. I called hydrogen innovations llc
directly a few months ago to discuss their equipment and the
misinformation. We discussed a
few claims listed on their web site.
Later I was told that if I wanted to purchase a unit for testing
to prove the claims were wrong, I would have to sign a non-compete
agreement. That was not likely
because I had been in the same business longer than they have.
I told the company rep.
about the inability of electrolyzer gases alone to produce great
mileage gains and he argued that a vehicle or two had achieved more
than 10% in mileage. I asked
what the condition of the testing were and he had no answer for
me. I do want to note here that
anytime I report test results on our web site, I give a full report of
the details of the test procedures and the raw data, followed by
conclusions. This is common
scientific method of reporting test results. Anything short of this is suspect of inaccuracy and
inconclusiveness. Let me give
you an example of lousy reporting of test results.
On another competitor’s web
site, one who has plagiarized my test results and web site address
(without the dash), a “test” is described as follows:
""Ok Gentlemen;
I have completed the installation of the Candlestick
H2 Booster on my 1996 Subaru Outback (2.2 liter). I took a road
trip totaling 777 miles. I ran the whole trip with the AC on and got
the following results from the 3 tanks of fuel I used:
Tank 1 - 26.43 mpg
Tank 2 - 25.75 mpg
Tank 3 - 28.39 mpg
Average MPG = 26.85
Previous mileage average for the month of June (AC
on) = 21.05 mpg
Previous mileage average for the month of July (AC
on) = 22.53 mpg
So, this appears to have increased my mileage by
about 21.59% over June and 16.09% over July for an overall average increase
of 18.84%. Not too bad for a $118.00 investment. ROI @ $1.45/gallon =
431 gals. So after I use 431 gallons it'll pay for itself. I use an
average of 60 gallons/month so in 7.17 months I'll have paid for the
unit. You could also say that at $1.45/gal. this unit saves me
$0.2732/gal., not too bad!""
I will say that at least
this testimonial doesn’t hide the truth, it just doesn’t recognize the
truth. In the last paragraph
the author says, “this appears to have increased my mileage…” Well that’s at least not a lie. He is only reporting what he
see. Of course what I see in
this “experiment” is not an increase in mileage caused by the
Candlestick H2 Booster, but an increase in mileage caused by a change
in driving conditions. It is
clear in his explanation that his better mileage was achieved when he
“took a trip totaling 777 miles” and the mileage he was comparing it to
was his average mileage over the past two months. Highway mileage of almost every
vehicle sold is always higher than the city mileage and the average
mileage. In fact an 18.84%
better highway mileage versus average mileage is rather
lackluster. My stock Saturn has
EPA city mileage of 29 mpg and Highway mileage of 40 mpg. That’s a 38% improvement of highway
over city mileage. So what does
all this prove? Well, it shows
that this web site at least didn’t lie, but the conclusions of the
author of the testimonial were not very valuable. If this was a report of “test
results” of a scientific experiment, the author would either be lying or
an idiot.
The biggest problem I have
with the site quoted above is their false statement made shortly after
the above quote. They say, “Check out the documented results from a
similar system that sells for $500.00 from some of those systems in
use.” Then they go on to cut and paste from
my copyrighted web page, the following:
Vehicle
Mileage
Improvement
Geo Metro 75.0
mpg hwy. 50%
Dodge Dakota 22.5 mpg hwy.
50%
Nissan Pathfinder 28
mpg hwy.
56%
Plymouth Neon 55.1 mpg hwy.
57%
Hyundai Excel
52 mpg hwy.
58%
Saab 9000 Turbo 44
mpg hwy.
60%
Dodge Ram
28 mpg ave.
75%
Cadillac Seville
30 mpg city
77%
Honda Accord
46 mpg ave.
80%
Hyundai Excel 45 mpg city
80%
Plymouth Neon 58.8 mpg city
103%
Saab 9000 Turbo
40 mpg city
168%
The
falsity of the statement is the claim that their device is a “similar
system” to our comprehensive Hydrogen Boost system. The candlestick device they are
advertising produces about a bottle cap full of gases per minute and
our hydrogen generator produce the whole bottle full per minute, and
our hydrogen generator is only a small part of our system. I would hardly call that similar.
Back to  . What’s wrong with their claims? First of all I have already
mentioned that great mileage gains are not likely to come from the
addition of electrolyzer gases alone.
That is why Hydrogen Boost is not a device, it is a system of
numerous components, including a hydrogen generator, fuel heater,
vaporizing system, electronic controls, engine treatment, higher tire
pressure, and driving and maintenance tips.
Their FAQ page makes the
following statements:
The system will process approximately 1
gallon of water every 1,500 to 2,000 miles.
After the unit warms up, it will draw an
average of 25 to 30 amps during normal operation.
When the HydroGen units are operating at
optimum levels, the units produce approximately 1 liter of hydrogen and
oxygen every 4 seconds.
Let me comment on these statements. First of all any electrolyzer, even at 100% efficiency,
running at 25-30 amps, can only produce about 2.6 liters of gases per
minute, not 15 liters per minute as claimed by the statement above (1
liter of hydrogen and oxygen every 4 seconds). It is established scientific fact
that normal electrolysis requires so much electrical power, and faster
gas production would be over-unity or free energy. If they had a unit producing free
energy they would not be selling it as a fuel enhancer.
Secondly as claimed above their system will process
approximately one gallon of water every 1500 to 2000 miles. I want you to know that one gallon
of water will produce 1800 gallons or about 6550 liters of gases. So what? Well, if you are going to produce that gas at 1 liter
every 4 seconds as stated above, then you’ll take only 437 minutes or
7.3 hours to do it. And if you
are going to travel 1500 to 2000 miles while using that 1 gallon, as
stated above, then you have to be driving 205 to 274 miles per hour.
If the first statement quoted from their web
site above is true, one gallon of water per 1500-2000 miles, and I
think this one is fairly accurate, then the gas production of their
unit is closer to close to 2 liters per minute (assuming 40 mph and
2000 miles). This would be
consistent with a normal electrolyzer working at 25-30 amps as they
claim theirs does. So what does
it say about honesty when a unit produces 2 liters of gases per minute
while the company is claiming 15 liters per minute (actually from my
phone conversation with the company a few months ago their claim was
15-25 liters per minute, even after I rebuked them for their
misinformation)? It is strange
to me that they would still be claiming the absurd 15 liters per minute
(I liter every 4 seconds) after being corrected and informed of the
absurdity of the claim. You
would think they wouldn’t want to be known of as fools. I guess they think their customers
are fools.
If the general result of adding electrolyzer gases to an
internal combustion engine throughout the industry, has consistently
caused modest increases in mileage (5-10%), and a company is claiming
that their electrolyzer alone can cause great increases in mileage
(20-40%), what does that tell you?
And if a company guarantees 15% increase in mileage and refuses
to spell out the conditions of their “money back guarantee,” and they
treat people like they did Larry Trowbridge, do you want to do business
with you.
Here is our Guarantee:
Our Hydrogen-Boost
System package is 100% satisfaction guaranteed. If you are not
satisfied with the performance of the Hydrogen-Boost System, you may
return it undamaged within 30 days for a full refund.
Unfortunately some optional accessories like engine treatment and
wiring kit will be damaged upon installation and therefore
non-returnable unless they are unused, uninstalled, or undamaged, and
in the original package.
Notice
that we do not require any record keeping of mileage or any time limit
before requesting a refund. We
only have a time limit for how long you can have our system before you
ask for a refund. It doesn’t
even matter if you had great increases in mileage. If you don’t like the system because
you don’t want to pour water into it, notify us within 30 days and send
it back. We do not want
unsatisfied customers. We have
given two refunds, both to customers who never installed the system,
one who ordered too large a unit, and the other who had unexpected
financial needs.
With
the above newsletter written and unpublished I sent the following email
to parnett@burnh2o.com, chief
of Hydrogen Innovations LLC.
----- Original Message -----
To: Hydro-Gen
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005
3:04 PM
Subject: Poor service
Please read the unpublished newsletter at http://www.hydrogen-boost.com/December%202005.html which
will be published next week unless you take steps to rectify the
situation with Larry Trowbridge. I'm sure you have his email
address since he has emailed you so many times. If not I can
forward it to you.
Protecting the industry,
Fran Giroux
I received a return receipt indicating that
the email had indeed been received, but I received no answer directly
from Paul Arnett. Larry however
received the following:
Larry,
Sorry for the delay in responding to
you. We have been involved in some
very time consuming deals that have required us to travel outside of
the
state.
We are willing to refund your money, less a
20% restocking fee. Once we
receive the unit in good working order, we will refund the money to you
within 30 days.
Sincerely,
Paul Arnett
_____
from: LARRY TROWBRIDGE
[mailto:larry631@verizon.net]
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 4:46 PM
To: parnett@burnh2o.com
Subject: Hydro-Gen return?
Hi Paul,
When I purchased your unit I had a place in
mind to install it. The space
was the right dimensions but, when I went to install the unit, there
wasn't
enough room to maneuver it into the spot. Brent suggested I relocate my
battery to the trunk. I purchased a battery relocation kit to do that.
Since
then I have been working overtime and haven't had time to install
everything. We are producing temporary housing units for FEMA to be
sent to
the victims of Katrina. Would you consider granting me a refund if I
return
the unit? I would of course absorb the shipping costs. I would
appreciate a
quick response as the money was borrowed from a friend. Thanks.
Larry Trowbridge
Larry’s response follows:
-----
Original Message -----
To: parnett@burnh20.com
Cc: Fran Giroux
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005
11:28 AM
Subject: Hydro-Gen refund
Dear
Paul,
I find it doubtful that your long overdue email came only because you
finally found time after your busy schedule. I expect that your
email was in response to the one you got from Fran. I got a
carbon copy myself. I also expect that your 20% restocking fee
would still make you a profit on your plastic toy hydrogen
generator. There can't be more than about $10 worth of material
in the main black box. Since I was totally fed up with being
ignored by your company, I asked Fran if there was anything I could do
about it. He graciously reimbursed me for the cost of the
unit. Now only a full refund will make it up to me, and I'm sure
Fran would expect nothing less. Since I have forwarded the unit
to Fran, he has even more invested in it than I did. I think a
full refund to me would settle the matter and Fran would ship it
directly back to you, assuming I received all the pieces I should
have. I received no list of parts so I can't confirm that I
received a full kit.
I would think that Fran would expect full refund
plus three shipping charges to settle the matter (one to me, one to
him, and one back to you). He is receiving a carbon copy of this
email. You can settle with me for a full refund or you can settle
with Fran. I'm sure you have his email address.
Respectfully,
Larry
Trowbridge
It has been over a week
without response form Hydrogen Innovations so as promised, I have here
published this newsletter, as a warning to you and others.
Click
here to ORDER
NOW
Home Savings
Test Results Technical Information Newsletter Order Contact
|