Carolina Shooters Forum banner
  • Please post in our Community Feedback thread for help with the new forum software! If you are having trouble logging in, please Contact Us for assistance.

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,783 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

I believe in the theory, but I just don't see how a DIYer could do this SAFELY. What pressure's are exerted burning hydrogen vs gasoline? Is a typical combustion engine up to the task? I don't know

Secondly, I can't go buy the "Hydrogen 1000" to put on DirtySCREW. Someone somewhere would invest and mass produce these babies and become a multi billionare. And I think that there are smart enough people out there that want to help the good ol' USA that would turn down millions trying to be bought out because they know they would make BILLIONS.

Gtown--what are YOUR thoughts?

DS
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
5,801 Posts
It is bs. Takes more energy to break the bond in the water than the energy you get from burning the hydrogen. And yes i am a chemist by training.

Electrolysis takes 118kcal per mole. Burning hydrogen produces 136 kcal per mole. As you see that is in a perfect system. By the time you add all the loses in the engine from friction and heat you do not even get close to breaking even.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,031 Posts
agreed, this "theory" is old though......and supposedly HAS been made to work...in the 50's or 70's, i believe. SUPPOSEDLY, though, it was bought out and tucked away by an oil conglomerate......................................................it's gotta be true, i read it on the interweb!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,501 Posts
Not to mention, there's only so much fresh water out there, granted probably more than fossil fuels, but we don't all need to ingest fossil fuels either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts
Not to mention, there's only so much fresh water out there, granted probably more than fossil fuels, but we don't all need to ingest fossil fuels either.
It may not be (currently) feasible, but not because of a limitation to the amount of fresh water.
When hydrogen is combusted, it joins with oxygen to form water (H[SUB]2[/SUB]O), the same fresh water that was separated into H and O through hydrolysis in the first place.

This technology is not yet economically viable, but it is more about separating H and O out of water, and then recombining it. That preserves the amount of water in the system, unlike destructive burning of finite fossil fuels​
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,908 Posts
This really DOES work, but it was shelved because the perpetual motion machine was found to have better ergonomics............... either that or cold fusion. Gets so hard to remember this stuff sometimes.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
5,801 Posts
hydrogen fuel cells definitely work, they powered the space shuttle. What they are doing is making H2 to run a combustion engine and the heat and friction losses of a combustion engine are too great for the small amount of net energy you get from burning H2 that is produced from the electrolysis of water. Not enough energy to overcome the friction and heat losses, I would guess they have a hidden electric source supplementing the electrolysis. Watching it closely they have an extra battery isolated from teh system.

And 30psi of H2 would be a friggin bomb.
 

·
Wings of Gold 1990
Joined
·
6,752 Posts
6.02x10^23
 

·
Wings of Gold 1990
Joined
·
6,752 Posts
Avogodro's Number! man..that takes me back awhile!

DS
I like to write that number out in standard notation on the board when I teach scientific notation. Blows their minds.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,532 Posts
iceland has been running hydrogen fuel for for years. they use the geo thermal energy to produce the hydrogen at the filling stations.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,195 Posts
This really DOES work, but it was shelved because the perpetual motion machine was found to have better ergonomics............... either that or cold fusion. Gets so hard to remember this stuff sometimes.
Good reply! If you could convert one kind of energy to another kind of energy and gain energy that would be perperual motion but it doesn't work that way. Every time you convert you lose. I learned that in the third grade and I don't understand why supposedly (is that a word) educated people think otherwise. Larry
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
13,863 Posts
This absolutely works. You can see it in the video. It is proven by the blue hoses. Nothing can run through blue hoses but water.

Control of that rule falls under the expanded powers of the mattress police.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,086 Posts
Good reply! If you could convert one kind of energy to another kind of energy and gain energy that would be perperual motion but it doesn't work that way. Every time you convert you lose. I learned that in the third grade and I don't understand why supposedly (is that a word) educated people think otherwise. Larry
Entropy.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,834 Posts
The horse is still the best converter of natural resources into substanible energy for transportation purposes of an individual although it quickly becomes a problem when used for mass transportation; finding a 200 horse parking space can be a problem.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top