Posted on 07/02/2008 10:11:37 AM PDT by Red Badger
Just over a year ago several media outlets reported that John Kanzius, an amateur inventor from Erie, Pa., had discovered a seemingly impossible phenomenon: a way to burn salt water by exposing it to radio waves. Videos of the experiment became YouTube sensations, though they garnered as many critical comments as favorable ones. Now that the initial fervor has waned, we checked in with Kanzius, a collaborator and some critics to see how the technique has progressed, or if it's just another example of Web-propelled junk science.
Kanzius' concept is simple: expose salt water to 13.56 MHz radio waves and light a match. Hydrogen separates from the water mixture and burns for as long as it's exposed to the frequency. The inventor actually made this discovery by accident: He was looking for a cure for cancer. Kanzius demonstrated it to local TV news stations as well as to Rustum Roy, a Penn State University geochemistry professor emeritus.
Roy collaborated with Kanzius on a paper confirming that radio frequency waves do indeed dissociate salt water into hydrogen and oxygen, and that the resulting mixture can be burned. News of the discovery was published in Materials Research Innovations (download PDF), a journal founded by Roy himself.
Burning hydrogen and oxygen to create energy is nothing new: It's been done in machines and automobiles for years. But the difference with Kanzius' would-be breakthrough is that the effect can be achieved with a much lower energy catalyst: radio waves are present in everything from microwaves to televisions. Roy cautions, however, that efficiency is still a major hurdle: "Nobody is claiming that you get more energy out than you put in," he says.
International interest in the technique has been huge, according to Kanzius and Roy. They say that researchers in countries such as France have begun using radio frequency in experiments that call for separating hydrogen from water. However, domestic investors have not been forthcoming, and the scientific community has been dubious. Richard Saykally, a chemistry professor at the University of California at Berkeley, called the recent paper's claims "pseudo-science" in an interview with Chemical and Engineering News.
Gary Friedman, a professor in the Electrical and Computer Engineering departments at Drexel University in Philadelphia, says Kanzius' discovery is far from groundbreaking. "People have reported for some time that electromagnetic radiation can enhance or affect water hydrolysis," he says. Still, he's not completely uninterested in their claims. "It seems promising, if it's true, that the electrolysis of water can be carried out without electrodes." Because electrodes wear out or change their behavior over time, Kanzius' method may require less maintenance than traditional electrolysis, which uses an electric current to separate hydrogen from water.
Kanzius and Roy hope that the increasing focus on the environment will enable them to get funding to continue their research. They even envision a future in which a vehicle can run off its radio's frequency waves.
But don't start filling your gas tank with salt water just yet.
See, right there is where it all goes wrong. The way it's supposed to work is that increasing focus on PROFITS will enable them to get funding to continue their research.
People love to make profits. If no one is funding this, then it's probably going to become a federally subsidized wealth redistribution scheme.
First we burn up all our corn, then we burn up all our water...
how the hell will we make whiskey?!?!?
Am I missing something here? If you have the electrical power in the car to produce the radio waves, why not just skip the water part and connect it to an electric motor to drive the wheels?
Acknowledging the First Law of Thermodynamics is a good place to start with this kind of thing.
Now between figuring out how much energy in vs. out, and showing this is a suitable form of hydrolysis, then maybe we'll finally nab two problems: simple hydrogen production (for fuel cell use), and desalination (for drinking water).
Wow Saline Air!
That would really help you non oceanside allergy prone people, ya think.
you can also pop corn with cellphones :p
Oh, that’s just soooooo old fashioned!...............
Finally, a sane and refreshing thought in the energy debate.
You're assumption is bad.
Yep.Watts are watts. It’s going to use the same amount of power to crack the water, which will be less than you can get from the hydrogen produced.
Al Gore claims to have found a way to control the weather.
Obama claims to have found a way to control Algore.............
There may be instances when it is preferable to carry around hydrogen as an energy source as opposed to carrying around batteries or batteries + water.
Please Red stop with this nonsense!
Which kind of engine do you want in your vehicle if your are living in International Falls in the middle of winter? One that runs on batteries or one that runs on a tankful of hydrogen?
Another high-tech snake oil salesman whose success depends on the communist-wrecked public education system turning out gullible dupes.
You’ve got to shuck a lot of oysters to find a pearl.............
The energy released in a hydrogen/oxygen reaction is greater?
Actually internal combustion is more efficient than chemical/battery power, that’s the only reason.
But it seems to me that using the energy from batteries to power the radio system would be rather... expensive. Having used many HF radios, I say that most radios aren’t that efficient. You input a large amount of power into the finals and toward the antenna but the coupling isn’t 100% efficient, so you lose energy. Oh well. (No such thing as perpetual motion!)
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.