*Maybe you're right...is synthetic oil a modified petroleum or something completely different?  I would think there would be a way to create a type of non-foaming soap style lubricant to replace oil, as far as engine design, with the push for electric vehicles, it will probably only be a matter of time before ICEs are outlawed regardless of the fuel source.

We should probably consider the synthetics as having a fossil fuel origin with a highly enriched or refined end product.  Almost, but not, all of the chemical industry uses byproducts of oil, whether it's to transport the goods, of to make them. ( sad really, but i don't know of any storks delivering newspapers or the mail, etc.)  THe oil industry will survive even if we stop using gasoline - in fact, if we did, the products we might see come out of that industry might just astound us "why didn't we do this sooner?" in other words. ...something like superplastics of motors made of pyrolitic carbon.

There are plenty of other oils available ...it's really their ability to maintain properties under hear.  A higher temperature oil is desireable - consider the nature of organic oils - they're come from plants of creature that produce the oils - they're essentially a storage mechanism for biological energy and if something is making oils which it cannot use, it will eventually outmode that production in favor of some other storage mechanism which it can use - like sugar; sugar not being good for an engine, ..it's highly unlikely that we'll find a plant or organism that's going to make an oil with high temperature resilience unless we find it in a hot spot where these oils won't cause it to float to the surface and cool off.  We're more likely to genetically engineer a bacteri, which produces tolerant oil - at which point we could have a massive crisis on our hands - who wants to clean up a never ending oil spill?

Personally, i think that harvesting energy under water in some region where there's little life and lots of undersea current is the best idea.  Per surface area, water outmodes air by atleast a factor of ten - making an undersea turbine out of noncorrosive low maintenance parts would yield more electricity per pound of machine than would any given wind turbine.

And, as for the hho mist, what I meant was a combination of H, HO, and H2O ion a ratio which would satisfy a lower combustion temperature or some other parameter where equivalent work is done.  A water vapor can be formed using high frequency agitation of the surface of water ( a submersible ceramic disk oscillator [fogger] ).

On another note, my check engine light has been on ..evap codes, nothing seems wrong and gas mileage is better than it has been.  Sometimes I don't wonder if the check engine light shouldn't just be replace with a dollar symbol.

In second passing; on the other hand )) ..reintroducing the exhaust would reincorporate h2o as it stands, and there may be no need for a fogger.  If Stanly Meyer were indeed using only water, there would be no co2 exhaust unless oil were burning ..am i not right in this regard?

You may be right, I don't have all the end emissions chemistry/physics down pat.  I read or was told somewhere HHO + spark + ambient air = H2O + CO2 - kinda like when we exhale we don't use gasoline lol.

we use sugar( for example) that we eat and carbon comes from there...our muscles burn glucosis into CO2 and water.
ICE is burning some oil that was left on the feet of the exhaust valves,and on the surface of the cilinder.Next to it  the various nitrogen oxides come out of it(because of the high temperatures of combustion).So indoor use of pure hydrogen ICE should be avoided anyhow.

we use sugar( for example) that we eat and carbon comes from there...our muscles burn glucosis into CO2 and water.
ICE is burning some oil that was left on the feet of the exhaust valves,and on the surface of the cilinder.Next to it  the various nitrogen oxides come out of it(because of the high temperatures of combustion).So indoor use of pure hydrogen ICE should be avoided anyhow.

Would it not be better for the engine to burn HHO or H2 than gasoline since gasoline would wash away some of the oil each time the engine fires and H2, even water does not?

Wouldn't there be a little increased CO2 as a natural result of the combustion process, or would the implosion of H2 be so different from normal combustion that its not a factor?

Good points, I'm working on a direct hydrogen injection via the spark plug hole to eliminate hho losses in the intake.  I think the key to running on hho has got to be in being very efficient as well as effective.  Losses have got to be minimized.  I'm sure feeding hho into the manifold gets plenty into the intake, some of the hydrogen molecules stick on and into different surfaces they come into contact with.

I purchased a little 75 cc pitbike (4 stroke) for my experiments - once I get it running on the alternative fuel, all I need to do is scale up the production.

Thanks, I may have to take you up on that, this week I made a direct injection setup going to the cylinder to bypass the whole flashback issue.  Are those vehicles running on H2 or HHO?  Do you know if the rich O2 will greatly affect the cylinder head temp on a HHO booster?