Potential fuel: salt water

Grenadier

Sr. Grandmaster
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
10,826
Reaction score
617
Interesting indeed...

If the energy output can exceed the energy required to weaken the H-O-H bonds, then I suspect that this guy will be on the fast track to the Nobel Prize.

If not, then it will be just like electrolysis: takes more energy to break the bonds than what you would be getting out of it.


http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8RIRI600&show_article=1


I doubt that they're going to be able to come out on top, getting a net gain, since burning hydrogen to power up turbines isn't too efficient, but I'll be the happiest person if I'm wrong.
 
There's still ethenal. Which, by the way, is used in several countries. And I mean pure ethenal.
 
I wonder what the cost of water will become if it is turned into fuel.
 
There's still ethenal. Which, by the way, is used in several countries. And I mean pure ethenal.
No, it's not ethanol. Ethanol is an alcohol (C2H5OH); water is water. H2O. What I've got to assume is happening is that the RF is doing electrolysis; splitting the molecule of H2O into H2 and O. Then, they're burning the hydrogen, and actually producing... H2O! That's the beauty of burning hydrogen to produce energy; the "exhaust" is steam. The problem is that producing and storing hydrogen often consumes more energy than is produced in burning it.
 
The article I read was "Salt" Water. i.e. the seas and oceans.

I think this is good investigation and should be continued.
 
No, it's not ethanol. Ethanol is an alcohol (C2H5OH); water is water. H2O. What I've got to assume is happening is that the RF is doing electrolysis; splitting the molecule of H2O into H2 and O. Then, they're burning the hydrogen, and actually producing... H2O! That's the beauty of burning hydrogen to produce energy; the "exhaust" is steam. The problem is that producing and storing hydrogen often consumes more energy than is produced in burning it.

Yah, I know what electrolosis is. I was saying "there is still 'seperate method X'". Yah know like, "we could also do this"
 
Back
Top