1 posted on
11/27/2005 6:53:37 AM PST by
wjersey
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
To: wjersey
And his electrolyzer cost about 70 cents an hour to operate, which he considers a bargain.Kind of depends on how much of this gas it produces for that 70 cents.
2 posted on
11/27/2005 6:59:12 AM PST by
Restorer
(They want to die, we want to kill them.)
To: wjersey
3 posted on
11/27/2005 6:59:43 AM PST by
jeremiah
(People wake up, the water is getting hot)
To: wjersey
Seems too good to be true.
4 posted on
11/27/2005 7:06:11 AM PST by
quantim
(Detroit is the New Orleans of the north. It was settled by the French and liberals still run it.)
To: wjersey
Interesting article. I hope they can make this viable.
If they cant make it run a car efficiently yet it already sounds great for welding and cutting. Or for lighting my grill.
"He holds the tip with his fingers to prove how cool it is to the touch, unlike such a tip when oxy-acetylene is burned for welding. But the instant he sets the flame on a charcoal briquette, it glows bright orange. Then, within seconds, he burns a hole through a brick, cuts steel and melts Tungsten.
The temperature of the flame is 259 degrees Fahrenheit. But it instantaneously rises to the melting temperature of whatever it touches, Klein said. Those temperatures can exceed 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit."
To: wjersey
9 posted on
11/27/2005 7:13:53 AM PST by
phil112
To: wjersey
10 posted on
11/27/2005 7:18:49 AM PST by
roaddog727
(P=3/8 A. or, P=plenty...............)
To: wjersey; neverdem
11 posted on
11/27/2005 7:19:38 AM PST by
bitt
( Dems: summer soldiers, sunshine patriots, and armchair Napoleons.)
To: AntiGuv
12 posted on
11/27/2005 7:19:54 AM PST by
bitt
( Dems: summer soldiers, sunshine patriots, and armchair Napoleons.)
To: wjersey
There's a reason electrolysis gas is not used large scale.
It's Dangerous as all hell. Lots of atomic hydrogen, most powerful acid, atomic oxygen, hydroxyl radicals (OH). It'll essentially etch the surface lifting, say, tungsten atoms free, which then burn (combine with the oxygen) which doesn't sound so bad. But everything else is combining with the oxygen, hydrogen, or hydroxyl. The "Everything else" is unpredictable. And that makes it dangerous.
13 posted on
11/27/2005 7:21:09 AM PST by
JohnCliftn
(In War: Resolution. In Defeat: Defiance. In Victory: Magnanimity. In Peace: Good Will.)
To: wjersey; All
This is commonly called "Brown's Gas" and has been around for a very long time. Google for Browns Gas and you'll find hundreds/thousands of sites/pages.
To: wjersey
This 'inventor' is infringing on Yull Brown's U.S. Patent (U.S. Patent 4081656, 1978) for Brown's Gas. Hope he has a good lawyer.
To: wjersey
Nice to hear positive news for once out of Clearwater.
Hope his idea works and gets put to good practical use!
19 posted on
11/27/2005 7:34:16 AM PST by
kstewskis
("Thank you ladies and gentlemen, you've been a wonderful audience" ...Rocky Rhodes)
To: wjersey
Sounds like Browns gas. They already use this for welding.
Do a search on the net and see.
22 posted on
11/27/2005 7:39:46 AM PST by
Ramtek57
To: wjersey
I wonder how his "Aquygen" is different from Brown's gas? I've read that Brown's gas can be used to weld dissimilar metals. Just as he described that his gas allows melting temperatures immediately, with Brown's gas, two dissimilar metals hit melting temperatures immediately, allowing them to melt together, or weld. I've also read that hydrogen used in gasoline powered cars is destructive to the type of metals typically used, causing cracking and other damage.
I've discovered Brown's gas thanks to the Internet and in the course of discovering how to nearly double the gas mileage in my own pickup truck. If the American public only knew what the government (and their vested interest in tax per gallon of gasoline), car companies and oil companies know about fuel vaporization we would have a revolution.
23 posted on
11/27/2005 7:42:00 AM PST by
Nephi
(Conservatives did what moderates/Bushbots wouldn't - we rescued Bush's judicial legacy for him.)
To: wjersey
I have a bridge in Brooklyn.
25 posted on
11/27/2005 7:42:27 AM PST by
hgro
(A)
To: wjersey
Okay, someone enlighten me. How can two H and one O combine and NOT be water? Oxygen has two hooks, hydrogen has one hook. THere's only one configuration for them to hook up.
Chemically speaking HHO makes no sense. It says that the H in the middle is bonding two ways, which isn't possible.
And there's no mention if H2 or H3 (atomic weight 2 or 3) are being used (or possibly created?) in this process.
So what exactly gives here? What am I missing?
26 posted on
11/27/2005 7:47:44 AM PST by
Tanniker Smith
(I didn't know she was a liberal when I married her.)
To: All
29 posted on
11/27/2005 7:56:12 AM PST by
carmelanne
(Sacred policies should be reviewd every six months!)
To: wjersey
To: wjersey
33 posted on
11/27/2005 8:23:10 AM PST by
babygene
(Viable after 87 trimesters)
To: wjersey
36 posted on
11/27/2005 8:24:48 AM PST by
VOA
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson