Why is this not in production? Great energy invention!, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 12-8-2006 @ 09:39 AM by Tom Bedlam
Originally posted by scoobdude
This engine is a nice redesign concept. I hope it makes it into production.

However.. you people who have doubts about hydrogen should feel much better once you read"Hydrogen can be taken from drano using an aluminum can as a catalyst. All you need to do is replace the water and the aluminum." (an aluminum can be disolved in as little as 5 minutes)

Needless to say this was discovered by a highschool drop out in canada. This was also about 3 years ago. No heat, no unsafe substances(once the drano is in a secure container), and on demand hydrogen.



Drop-outs Patent Hydrogen Production Method Take drano, add scrap aluminum cans and you get novel way to make hydrogen gas. Source: Nashua Telegraph [Nov 29, 2003] A 69-year-old, 10th-grade Canadian drop-out and his 58-year-old Norwegian cousin, who himself left school in the eighth grade, have just been granted two U.S. patents on a process that produces hydrogen by throwing discarded aluminum cans or foil into water laced with Drano.


from :
www.duckworksmagazine.com...

Best of all you won't need the aluminum recycling bin any more

Also BMW's hydrogen system has been able to freeze hydrogen so it should be alot safer (there are still problems with this however). But on their mini, they got gas like performance.



We used to blow up hydrogen balloons at school with this...in the late 70's. We got it from a book. It's not new.

It's also not an energy source. Do you have any idea how much electricity it requires to make that aluminum? You'd be far better off using a hydrolyzer on the water in terms of efficiency. And hydrolyzers suck.

You guys DO know that hydrogen is an environmental issue, right? It's got that one-two punch...it destroys ozone AND forms high-altitude water vapor that's a greenhouse gas. Not only that, it leaks out of nearly anything you put it in. They're expecting a 10% loss rate.

ledbetter: that is a cool looking engine. I wish he would make one that would fit my motorcycle frame.

[edit on 12-8-2006 by Tom Bedlam]



reply posted on 12-8-2006 @ 10:26 AM by Harte
Originally posted by Tom Bedlam
Originally posted by scoobdude

Drop-outs Patent Hydrogen Production Method Take drano, add scrap aluminum cans and you get novel way to make hydrogen gas. Source: Nashua Telegraph [Nov 29, 2003] A 69-year-old, 10th-grade Canadian drop-out and his 58-year-old Norwegian cousin, who himself left school in the eighth grade, have just been granted two U.S. patents on a process that produces hydrogen by throwing discarded aluminum cans or foil into water laced with Drano.



We used to blow up hydrogen balloons at school with this...in the late 70's. We got it from a book. It's not new.

It's also not an energy source. Do you have any idea how much electricity it requires to make that aluminum? You'd be far better off using a hydrolyzer on the water in terms of efficiency. And hydrolyzers suck.


I was going to say this, as well as to point out that Drano doesn't last forever in a chemical reaction either.

On the other hand, exactly this hydrogen-generating process is conducted around the clock in literally hundreds of U.S. locations, and the hydrogen is allowed to merely escape into the atmosphere.

The process of anodizing aluminum involves a chemical etch bath as one of the first steps in the process. The etch bath is nothing more than a heated Sodium Hydroxide solution (same as most drain cleaners - also called lye and/or caustic.) Perhaps this hydrogen could be recovered. It's being generated anyway!

Originally posted by Tom BedlamYou guys DO know that hydrogen is an environmental issue, right? It's got that one-two punch...it destroys ozone AND forms high-altitude water vapor that's a greenhouse gas...

Recovery of hydrogen generated in industrial processes like anodizing (there's probably other processes that also generate hydrogen, but I don't know of any) would then also have a one-two punch. Since the hydrogen is today allowed to escape - it must already be doing the damage you claim.

However, water vapor as a greenhouse gas is a non-issue, really. There is so much water on the planet, the atmosphere only holds the amount that it can hold. If it warms up, it can hold more. But if it does warm up, it won't care where the vapor comes from. It would just as easily obtain vapor in the natural way (from the ocean) if we didn't provide it through the oxidation of hydrogen.
Harte


reply posted on 12-8-2006 @ 02:50 PM by Long Lance
Originally posted by Harte



However, water vapor as a greenhouse gas is a non-issue, really. There is so much water on the planet, the atmosphere only holds the amount that it can hold. If it warms up, it can hold more. But if it does warm up, it won't care where the vapor comes from. It would just as easily obtain vapor in the natural way (from the ocean) if we didn't provide it through the oxidation of hydrogen.
Harte




that's hilarious, mate, i'm sorry really, don't feel offended but that's was a good laugh


i mean you KNOW that carbon dioxide is the devil because they told you so and you KNOW that water is benign because frankly, demonizing it on a planet whose surface is covered by seas to an extent of roughly three forths wouldn't fly before the next big scare arrives, right :p

did you know that pure gases have absorbtion lines, while fluids and solids tend to block out large parts of the spectrum? yes? overcast day anyone?


now you're going to claim that clouds will catch the heat in the atmosphere, (which is hard to disprove without first hand data, isn't it) but then i'll have to ask you (or anyone) how condensed steam doesn't vaporise when heated...? did you know that methane (another eeevil gas) is alledgedly many times worse than CO2? did you know that plants produce it in considerable amounts? did you know that people can't make climate models which remain true to real world events for more than a *** break if that, when using coarse resolution? (well that was a bit condescending probably but you'll get my drift) did you know that remnants of trees were found below glaciers in Switzerland?

either way, don't think i'm addressing you personally, i'm adressing anyone who blindly buys into the fearmongering, scapegoating and profiteering. <-more on that later. if i got the wrong impression i apologize in advance if not read on.


global warming or not, but we don't know much about it (or those who do keep it very secret) and shouldn't pretend we do. CO2 is not toxic and trees like it, so direct your fear elsewhere, because it results in such SURREAL proposals such as blowing CO2 into the seas or the ground - negligent and stupid pracrice if ever brought to large scale use - see african killer lakes for a glimpse of the dangers, not to metnion the cost! but i guess a few industry barons would 'earn' err gain another fortune,m ultimately at taxpayer's and consumer's expsense, as usual.

plants

CO2



(end OT)


back on topic: weight is of course affecting revenue, i know that the market price of the end product is largely arbitrary, but every pound of metal sold is revenue for the metal mill, same for pretty much everything else, i doubt the aluminium mill gets a bouns for metal that will go into a sportscar. the same tendency can be seen everywhere, from military aircraft to lawnmowers, probably.



[edit on 12-8-2006 by Long Lance]


reply posted on 12-8-2006 @ 08:58 PM by Harte
Originally posted by Long Lance
Originally posted by Harte

However, water vapor as a greenhouse gas is a non-issue, really. There is so much water on the planet, the atmosphere only holds the amount that it can hold. If it warms up, it can hold more. But if it does warm up, it won't care where the vapor comes from. It would just as easily obtain vapor in the natural way (from the ocean) if we didn't provide it through the oxidation of hydrogen.
Harte


that's hilarious, mate, i'm sorry really, don't feel offended but that's was a good laugh

See, now this I don't get. I'm not in any way speculating on the reality (or unreality) of global warming due to any greenhouse gasses. I just said that water vapor as a greenhouse gas is a non-issue. Seems like what you say here:
Originally posted by Long Lance
global warming or not, but we don't know much about it (or those who do keep it very secret) and shouldn't pretend we do. CO2 is not toxic and trees like it, so direct your fear elsewhere...

Pretty much agrees with what I said.


No man, I was talking about recovering hydrogen that is just going to waste right now, as we speak. Hydrogen as a fuel. If you are of the opinion that burning hydrogen is a bad idea, fine. Say so. I don't advocate it myself as a way to abate any global warming, I tend to agree with you on that issue.

I have doubts that water vapor could cause any problem at all in that area. Which is basically what I said. Why is that funny?

Harte


reply posted on 14-8-2006 @ 10:24 PM by 80211
NEWS FLASH!

The cars being mass produced and sold in the world today are old technology. Far more fuel efficient engines have existed for years, they are not in production because of oil lobbyists paying off all major auto makers. Sort of similar to what happened to the electric car (
Who Killed the Electric Car?) and why they were replaced by hybrids.

150MPH is not that efficient there have been independent inventors creating similar engines for years, some capable of well over 250MPG. But the oil companies would never let one come into mass production. They have enough cash to buy off everyone who as so much as seen this engine let alone the inventor/holder of patents and rights.

If you dont belive me about the current engine technology take a look for your self. Supermileage
Those are the results of the 27th annual SAE Supermileage competition. University of British Columbia came out on top at 3,145MPH of course they had extensive funding and those arent exactly street/highway mileages but affordable commercial grade engines can VERY easily be built by auto makers. Hell even some of the high schools beat the 1000MPH mark.

The technology is out there it's just not in use.
Aren't big world dominating corporations fun.
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^