Yes, they're actually saying it works because...
It's not like the local news team is a fountain of knowledge when it comes to matters of science. Hell, just their "test" is so full of holes that the results are absolutely meaningless. What truck are they driving that got 9.4mpg driving 55mph on the "giant treadmill" we call a "dynamometer"?
That single piece of data immediately raises the bullshit flag - a vehicle rolling on a dyno at 55mph, with no wind resistance to overcome, little rolling resistance, no incline, no nothing, should be barely sipping from the fuel tank. The fact they got 9.4mpg is recockulous.
The difference in mileage could easily have been generated by changing the loading on the dyno. I can run a vehicle on the dyno at 55mph with nearly 0 load (23.2mpg), or I can crank up the load so the driver has to maintain 50% throttle just to maintain the speed (9.4mpg). Wow! Magic!!
And just to cap off the ultra-scientific test, they compare their actual on-the-road test to the dyno test. They got 16.1mpg on the road, and point out that that's 58% better than before. Ummmm, isn't that also 30%
worse than your dynamometer test showed? So which number is right? What was the mileage when you did the on-the-road testing prior to installing the Hydro-4000? Ohhhhh, you didn't do that?
As for the science of it, dkozloski's explanation is exactly right. You will use more energy to power the electrolysis process than you get back by burning the hydrogen produced. A quick google will find explanations all over the 'net like the one here -
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...4111822AAiYMJ0 - that debunk this shit.
Edit: I couldn't help it, I had to go watch the video. When I read the article and it said their "truck" got 9.4mpg I was thinking maybe they had tested the thing on a big news truck - you know, the ones with the satellite dish on top. Instead, it's a freaking Dodge Durango. 9.4mpg from a ****ing Durango? And they report that like it's perfectly normal! What a bunch of idiots.