Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Could This be True? (Salt Water Fuel)
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/837049/how_to_turn_water_into_fuel/ ^

Posted on 09/25/2007 9:02:17 PM PDT by Dallas

If true, the oil companies will bury this invention.

CLICK HERE for video.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: breakingnews; johnkanzius; kanzius
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last
To: GATOR NAVY

You need extra sheets of tinfoil in that hat.....


21 posted on 09/25/2007 9:28:13 PM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom; Dallas

That’s probably the most succint overview of the laws of thermodynamics that I have heard.

Dallas, not to be rehashing this old discussion, but the question you *always* have to ask, is, how much energy it took for them to create the hydrogen to burn, whatever ‘magic’ process they used. If it took more than what you get by burning the hydrogen produced, it’s useless and most likely it has some kind of a scam attached to it.

And they *never* say how much they used. Because, if they measured it correctly, it was far more then what they got out. See law #1.


22 posted on 09/25/2007 9:28:13 PM PDT by farlander (Try not to wear milk bone underwear - it's a dog eat dog financial world)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JLS

I loved the episode where they corroded jailbars using salsa and DC current!


23 posted on 09/25/2007 9:45:31 PM PDT by uptoolate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dallas
As I see it: microwave radiation breaks up the saltwater molecules into its base components of Hydrogen & Oxygen with the salt acting as the conductor/catalyst.

The important question here is how much energy is required to start the electrolytic reaction as this is what seems to be happening.
Secondly, this may be a much cheaper way to extract hydrogen instead of the conventional method of using expensive platinum plates from water or from existing hydrocarbon fuels (natural gas, etc) since those methods produces a lot of CO2 by product waste.

24 posted on 09/25/2007 9:46:55 PM PDT by prophetic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farlander
Well, at first glance atomic fission is a way of getting more energy out then what's 'put in' and just look what happened with that... Over-regulated and over-managed to the point of inefficiency vs. competing energy supplies, i.e. the status quo.

Perhaps this is a new RF method for efficiently releasing molecular energy similar to neutron bombardment in fusion reactions.

Considering how simple this method appears along with all that THEY had to go through to decrease the efficiency of fusion power to not upset the status quo we can probably say this guy's a Dead Man Walking. ; )

25 posted on 09/25/2007 9:51:28 PM PDT by Justa (Politically Correct is morally wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Justa

Err fission power....


26 posted on 09/25/2007 9:53:35 PM PDT by Justa (Politically Correct is morally wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

Probably. But that announcer could generate some heat....


27 posted on 09/25/2007 10:04:12 PM PDT by pankot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dallas

Let me guess, you got this in an e-mail that said send this to everyone in your address book? This hoax has been posted on FR multiple times before.


28 posted on 09/25/2007 10:04:26 PM PDT by anymouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JLS

OK, OK, I heard you the first time.


29 posted on 09/25/2007 10:05:28 PM PDT by 353FMG (Government is the opiate of the people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: facedown

Gee, I don’t know. I like the first version better.

Note that these paraphrases shift the semantic ground as they go along, so they are obscurantist in-jokes, and not pedagogical aids.

Note that the First Law says that you always break even precisely, in terms of energy conservation.

The Second Law says that you can’t run a closed cycle at 100% efficiency, hence, “you can’t break even”, but this is in a different sense than the first paraphrase.

The Third Law says that you can’t reach Absolute Zero, which could be seen as some sort of escape, if you could do it, and it continues the poker theme, so it has to be granted a modicum of cleverness.

I don’t know how you would construe the Third Law as, “You can’t even come close” because it says you can get as close as you please to Absolute Zero, but you can never make it all the way.


30 posted on 09/25/2007 10:07:56 PM PDT by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Dallas

The modern Philosophers Stone.


31 posted on 09/25/2007 10:11:10 PM PDT by VR-21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justa
Well, at first glance atomic fission is a way of getting more energy out then what's 'put in' and just look what happened with that...

This RF water trick and fusion are two different animals. In the case of the water, you are just bonding and unbonding atoms. You take a stable, low energy molecule of water, put energy into it, and you get two high energy hydrogen atoms and one high energy oxygen atom. And when they bond back together (as in combustion), you get back the same amount of energy that you put into them (minus losses due to inefficiencies). With fusion, you are actually converting matter into energy. You are feeding the reaction some energy in the form of energy (to keep it going) and some energy in the form of matter. You get back a lot more energy than you put in, because the matter has been converted. This is not the same as simply bonding and unbonding atoms.

32 posted on 09/25/2007 10:12:40 PM PDT by NurdlyPeon (Thompson / Hunter in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Dallas

And what is powering the EM field?


33 posted on 09/25/2007 10:19:59 PM PDT by N3WBI3 (Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dallas
No, this is just some of that silly free energy crap that pops up from time to time, and makes all the over unity wishful thinkers and magnet twirlers excited, or another scam artist out to make a fast buck by sucking in people all too willing to "invest" some of their money to develop the device that will save the planet.

This particular claim has been made hundreds of times over the past 50 years or so. It resurfaces every once in a while. Here's a few sites that list these devices for your reading pleasure:

Museum of unworkable devices

How the scam artists operate:

How to get rich pitching free energy devices

34 posted on 09/25/2007 10:20:24 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dallas

I’ll share, for free, the secret of generating 10,000 watts of electricity from ordinary water.

First, start with a 1 megawatt nuclear power facility and a large supply of water.

Second, use the electricity from the facility to break down water into its component elements.

Third, burn the hydrogen to generate heat to run a turbine to generate the electricity you want.


35 posted on 09/25/2007 10:22:28 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dallas

Yet another demonstration of how utterly clueless the media is about hard science. If the media can’t understand the basic laws of conservation that are taught in 7th or 8th grade, why would anyone believe their accounts about the environment, medicine or cosmology?


36 posted on 09/25/2007 10:23:24 PM PDT by RBroadfoot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dallas

Thermodynamics strongly suggest it’s not a new energy source; but it might be a new method for desalinization of sea water. And it’s a nice addition to the science of water chemistry.


37 posted on 09/25/2007 10:28:14 PM PDT by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: expatpat
There are a bunch of magnet twirlers over at www.overunity.com getting all excited by building a 3rd grade science class magnet battery motor and then winding up a bunch of thin wire (making a crude coil) and getting a spark, like you would get from a spark plug coil. (they think it's some mysterious plasma enery from "the vaccum" which they are then trying to feed back and recharge the battey thus making a "free energy" motor.

it's quite hillarious to read these idiots postings. they are quite oblivious to what they are actually doing.

These people are what our school is churning out as high school graduates, our "future."

God help us.

38 posted on 09/25/2007 10:29:49 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

I promise I’m not trying to start an argument, but I don’t get why this automatically violates the laws of thermodynamics.

I suspect that since it takes 200 watts to generate the waves used to release the hydrogen that it does require more energy than is released and therefore nothing buy hype. That’s obvious, but the numbers on that aren’t out yet.

In terms of wattage I really don’t know how much is actually being released by the process. It isn’t a case of creating energy but of freeing captured energy. If there are 201 watts released then it is a winning situation (I hate using watts for this since it is inappropriate, but other than temperature watts are the only numbers expressed.

I know that they are currently studying this issue, so I don’t think the automatic dismissals are justified just yet. On the other hand, this kind of research could probably be done in a really short period of time—like before they put out the press release.

Again, just wondering why people seem to automatically think this violates the laws of thermodynamics.


39 posted on 09/25/2007 10:31:06 PM PDT by Comstock1 (If it's a miracle, Colour Sergeant, it's a short chamber Boxer Henry point 45 caliber miracle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew

Hmmm, had a girlfriend like that way back in the 60’s. Could get real close but just couldn’t quite make it.


40 posted on 09/25/2007 10:34:25 PM PDT by biff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson