Posted on 09/14/2007 10:32:35 AM PDT by ckilmer
From an economics standpoint, it depends as much on the intented application as opposed to the energy in vs out ratio. Batteries, for instance, are by definition a net energy sink, but for their application, they are "efficient."
We keep seeing how "huge" the "potential" of this "discovery" is but, as yet, we haven't been giving one factual, measured and peer-reviewed piece of information about it.
Until we start seeing some facts, this: ------------------------------------------- "is six inches, Honey."
I’m interested in total power coming from the burning hydrogen. So far to me it just looks like a fancy electrolysis set up with the released hydrogen burning immediately.
//////////////
I don’t think that’s whats happening. Rather the RF is tuned to the atomic frequency of platinum ie its creating a “synthetic” catalyst. The water is fooled into “thinking” that platinum is in the water. That destabilizes the water. The role of the Na in the process is much like any metal in a microwave. It gets hot fast. Na is a heat sink. The high heat is what cracks out the H2 from destabilized H20 molecule. The process is not greatly dissimilar to what happens in carbon steam reformation.
Both salt and water are inert molecules. They don’t come apart easily; it takes energy to “strip” them into component parts. The experiment in question admittedly requires 200W of energy input to do whatever it’s doing; therefore, the energy output (even if the flame is 3000 degrees) is less than 200W. It’s an endothermic process, but the guy is claiming exothermic results - which is plainly absurd to anyone who passed high-school chemistry and still remembers enough of it.
Put another way: he’s claiming a perpetual-motion machine. Put saltwater in, tear it apart, put it back together again, and when back to the beginning have more energy than you started with.
You can’t do that.
It’s a law of nature.
Apparently a lot of people don’t understand that “it’s a law of nature” means _you_can’t_do_that_even_if_you_want_to_.
Battery technology still focuses on in vs. out. It is just much more intent on “out” because you are talking about input and output being at different times.
Maybe it could be placed in the field of a current radar installation and piggy-back on the already generated RF.
Then bottle the fuel and carry it to a point of use.
the process doesn’t need to achieve parity for it to be ground breaking
True. All my points still stand.
////////////////
Your points are appropriate for a government/university/corporate scientist.
Kanzuis has a problem. He’s not a university/government/corporate scientist. He’s a tinkerer with a background in radio. How does he get his stuff into the public domain.
Yeah, the temperature of the filament in one of those 75 watt bulbs gets considerably higher than 3,000F, I believe.
Sounds like Edison. Generally, go to the media before you have your patent or at least a head start isn't a winner of an idea, unless you are looking for grant money.
It’s a press release for crying out loud! Where’s either the patent or the peer reviewed paper? Sounds like someone is trolling for investment dollars that will be used for many things except investment.
It depends how much material you are heating and it’s specific heat.
Heating one atom of hydrogy to 3000 degrees would take very little energy.
Heating an anvil to 3000 degrees takes alot more energy.
Simply stating the temperature of the flame does not give any useful information about the energy output.
If they were to get more energy out than in, either they would measure a decreased temperature in the water after applying the machine, end up with a substance with a different specific heat or much less likely released energy in a way not previously described by physics.
BTW, it is easy to measure energy output by measuring temperature change, mass of material and specific heat of the material but you need all three variables.
Are we sure sodium isn’t being stripped from its cloride ion causing the sodium to burn in solution?
//////////////
In saltwater the Na & Cl are already broken apart.
The Na by itself is a metal. In this case its likely acting as heat sink as any metal would in a microwave. Likely the RF first destabilizes the the H20 and then the superheated Na breaks it up.
According to lab reports I’ve heard...there is a small decrease in Na from solution but it is not enough to account for the flame—or even the color of the flame.
Use sunlight (free) to produce 200 Watts to liberate undetermined BTUs. The point being an enormous supply of saltwater availability>
Easy. Start a thread publishing the details on FreeRepublic.com - it's free and he'd get lots of publicity.
The flame is the separated O2 and H2 burning to recombine.
One square meter of solar panel will make about a dimes worth of electricity per day.
There is just not enough concentrated power in sunlight to pay for the panels.
BTW, The electricity is more valuable than the hydrogen.
If you are interested in solar energy, you can let mother nature concentrate it for you as captured in biomass, wind or hydro power.
Goofy “burning saltwater!” and “perpetual motion” variant absurdities aside, this could make a decent way of desalination. Break down the water to O2 & H2, capture the gasses, burn them to recombine into pure water. Recapture the waste heat energy & feed back into energy source to minimize total energy in. Provides the advantage of electrolisis-based desalination without the electrodes.
While I have urged folks to be patient to judge this new device, they are of course absolutely right to point out that it must produce more energy than it takes to run the device, if it is to be the great breakthrough that it’s promoters say it is. I have serious doubts that will be the case.
Despite the likelihood this is going to prove not to be a device that will ever attain 100% plus energy output, I do find the idea of splitting the water and burning off the hydrogen by radio waves to be interesting.
Those of you in the field, has water been broken down by radio waves before, allowing the hydrogen to be burned off?
It’s a press release for crying out loud! Where’s either the patent or the peer reviewed paper? Sounds like someone is trolling for investment dollars that will be used for many things except investment.
/////////////
they’re looking for the federal labs to put a couple scientists onto playing with this.
Use sunlight (free) to produce 200 Watts to liberate undetermined BTUs. The point being an enormous supply of saltwater availability>
///////////////
this would be ok as an energy storage device—for those hours of the day in which there was no sunlight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.