Ok, as an engineer, I have a couple problems with this:

Quote:

Most internal combustion engines operate at about 35 per cent
efficiency. This means that only 35 per cent of the fuel is fully
burned. The rest either turns to carbon corroding the engine or
goes out the exhaust pipe as greenhouse gases.

Rebuttle:

This is a grossly written statement. Most internal combustion engines operate at 35% efficiency. True. What that means, is that 35% of the energy generated by the engine is actually going toward moving your car, running your alternator and air conditioner, etc. it has nothing to do with combustion efficiency. Even if 100% of the gasoline was being burned, the trouble with combustion engines is that most of the heat produced is lost due to radiative heat losses.

Also, if any car on the road allowed 65% of its fuel to go unburned into the atmosphere, it would NEVER pass emmisions inspections. I just had my car inspected recently, the UHC (unburned hydro-carbons) was like 1%. Again, even though my car burned 99% of the fuel (combined between the engine itself and the exhaust system that removes UHC's) it only used 35% of the fuel energy to actually move the car. The rest is eaten up by friction and radiative heat losses.

Quote:

The H2N-Gen increases burn efficiency to at least 97 per cent, Williams said. This saves fuel and greatly reduces emissions.

Rebuttle:

We are already burning 99% of the fuel. Adding Hydrogen to the system will give a 'hotter' burn which will keep down the engine deposits. Todays newer cars already have a 're-burn' system. They burn the UHC's in the exhaust system, pumping the nitrous-oxides back into the engines to combust a second time. The higher efficiency of this H2N-Gen system comes from the hotter burn and the fact that its putting 10 pounds of crap into an 8 pound bag, directly increasing the compression ratio. This, by the way, may save you a few oil changes, but expect to have piston and valve trouble later in the car life.

Just my two slags.

Kshaar