rgrintz

i got this in my email today. it's a cutting torch that runs on water. it is pretty cool. thought i would post it up.

http://media.putfile.com/Water-Fuel

cdogtibby1

yea thats awesome... see, all the world needed was a crazy gas price increase to get the gears in motion towards alternate energy

jToIeB

That statement seems pretty ignorant in itself...don't forget, everything that you've learned from your "higher education" was figured out by someone who wasn't educated in the matter. I actually saw a piece on the news a few days ago about some guy who's trying to figure out a way to get electolysis devices in everyone's home so you could make your own hydrogen gas and not need to fuel up anywhere but your garage.

REDZMAN

^^^
THAT"S THE STUFF!!!
Yup, that's the same guy, same place I saw on TV here, but the interview is slightly different.


Good find man, really.

x2stpsfrmnowhere

This is a great idea, that will never work. Lemme explain. Here's the equation for this reaction
2(h2o)=2(h2)+o2. Meaning to form 2 mols of hydrogen and 1 mol of oxygen 2 mols of water must by broken apart using an electric current. The energy required to break a H-O bond is 460.548Kj. So the energy required to break the 4 H-O bonds in the 2 water mols is 1842.192Kj. The energy required to bond H-H is 431.24Kj, and to bond O=O is 485.669Kj. So the bonding of 2(H-H)=862.48Kj, and the bonding of 1(O=O) is 485.669, for a grand total of 1348.149Kj of energy released in the bonding of the H's and O's. So you've consumed 1842.192Kj to break water apart and released 1348.149Kj when bonding the H's and O's. Now we know by the law of conservation of energy that the energy we put in must equal the energy we get out. Obviously 1842.192 is not equal to 1348.149. The difference in energy is stored in the bonds of the newly formed H-H and O=O. So theoretically when we combust the H-H and O=O we will release that energy and have not used any energy hence the idea of free energy. But since these things NEVER will work at 100% effeciency you will not get this energy back. Some of it is lost due to friction and motion. Therefore everytime you break the water apart, and combust the products to reform water you will lose a portion of the energy. In the end your putting in more energy than your getting out. This man is a pure dreamer. Had he gone to college and taken an introductory chemical engineering course he would have learned there is no such thing as free energy, never has been, and never will be. It still looks great on paper though.

purpletib

That's just the point... Everyone said that it would take more energy that it produces to make energy in this fashion, but he did it with very little energy. His car ACTUALLY ran with this system. His prototype device is what is shown in the video. He used the hydrogen produced as a torch right on the video. The oil industry in the middle east offered him a BILLION DOLLARS to not go any further with his work. Yeah, it could have been all lies and smoke, but in the end his patents ended up getting him killed. If it wasn't real, why did he have a hit put on him?

brian01tib

x2stpsfrmnowhere Thanks for getting all the numbers and explaining. I just turned my chem book and didnt feel like looking all over the house for another. Not only the bonds prove it but also electrochem etc.


That statement seems pretty ignorant in itself...don't forget, everything that you've learned from your "higher education" was figured out by someone who wasn't educated in the matter. I actually saw a piece on the news a few days ago about some guy who's trying to figure out a way to get electolysis devices in everyone's home so you could make your own hydrogen gas and not need to fuel up anywhere but your garage.

I seem ignorant? What you said has nothing to do with making energy, good job fing02.gif . Of course you can make H2 gas in your garage this guy was talking about making energy by making a reaction go one way then back the other. Which is totally worng you cant do that. And an electrolysis device is extreamly simple to make btw. You can make a primative one in a few minitues.

StrikeEagle

He's splitting the water molecules and using the hydrogen in such a way that it combines with the water, and is combustive. He's burning the water, primarily the hydrogen. He had a flame coming out of the top of his contraption at that one point, and the flame from the exploding hydrogen was plenty to keep his process going. It's not a perpetual motion machine, as at some point the water will run out (primarly the hydrogen will run out of the water). The calculations aren't quite correct as he's getting a lot of energy from the combustion of the hydrogen molecules.
People would't be paying this guy billions of dollars to stop if it didn't work in the first place. Can't argue wth that...
SE

purpletib

OK, I just watched the vid again for a little better understanding. The device in the video is a simple device he used for the patent offices to prove his idea works. It is not his current more advanced model. It does not work on conventional electrolysis, it turns it on it's head. With electrolysis, it is typical to take three times as as much energy as it produces, along with the byproduct of heat. With his device, the water temperature does not increase even one degree and it only takes less that half of an amp to run and produces several hundred percent more energy than it consumes. If this was a bunch of BS, he would have never been able to get several international patents on his work. Think about it. How much work and testing does it take before you are granted a patent? This thing has to work. And by the look of it, either his work was copied after he was killed or others have simply followed suit. Here is another site that discusses a water based car. They are/were trying to generate donations to make this technology work on a large scale to benefit society.

http://www.pureenergysystems.com/news/2004...rCar/index.html

Along with another little website i came across that supposedly has instructions for anyone to convert their internal combustion engine to run on tap water. I'd be tempted to try this, considering my fiancee and I go through $1000/month in gas. Any takers to try it out?

http://www.netmar.com/~maat/archive/feb2/carplans.htm

Think about it. 106 years ago people thought that we would never ride in a mechanically operated vehicle. 103 years ago people thought that we would never fly. Why not now, in the next century, can't there be ideas and inventions that will forever change our beliefs and our dependence and functionality of technology?

Scratch that about the 106 years ago with the automobile... I meant 112 years ago. Too late to edit. mad.gif

brian01tib

I thought he was doing 2H2O -> 2H2 + O2 Then 2H2+ O2 -> 2H2O. Which wont produce energy. What equation are you talking about? I thought his little flame was just the H2 and O2 reaction.