Salt water as fuel. Offically working......

reply to post by etshrtslr


It burns so hot because it is burning hydrogen.

2 985 deg Kelvin is its flame temperature so he is a little off on his measurements which is understandable. Its not easy to measure such high temps.

reply to post by etshrtslr


Ok. That's a perception error. Temperature is not energy. It's easy to conflate the two.

I have a little oxy-acetylene hand torch, it's small enough to hold in one hand. The flame can reach a really high temperature. But it's not much energy. If I tried to weld a big I-beam with it, it won't be able to pump enough energy into the beam to soften the metal. But it's HOT. It's just not much HEAT. They're not the same.

So, with nothing but a lantern battery, two wires and a glass of salt water, I can make hydrogen and oxygen, and collect the gases. If I ignite them, they'll burn (very briefly) at a very high temperature. But if I collect all the heat that's generated, it's not much, in fact, you'll generally find that it's about 40% of the energy the battery supplied.

So something can be very HOT (temperature) without having a lot of HEAT (energy).

Another thought example might be a white hot needle and a bathtub full of warm water. If I measure the temperature of the water, throw the white hot needle into it (pffsss!) then remeasure the water, I'll never be able to see it change. The needle was hot, but didn't have much heat.

This relates to the mystery of the burning salt water this way (I always hear the guy on Dragonslayer say that ...'BURNING WATAH!'). Let's say Kanzius' setup draws 1 kWh from the wall socket. That's energy. Out of the briny deep comes so much hydrogen and so much oxygen. If I collect those gases, dry them, and put them in containers at a known temperature and volume, I can measure the pressure and know how many moles of hydrogen and oxygen I got for my kWh of energy. I know how much energy can be retrieved by burning the two gases from chemistry.

The efficiency of his process will then be the energy I can get from the gases, divided by the kiloWatt-hour I used to make them. If that's >1, then the process is "over unity" (that's where the term comes from). If it's < 1, and I'll bet you a nice bottle of wine it is, then the closer it comes to 1 the more cost effective it is. If it's closer than a typical electrolysis cell, then it may be worth doing it that way.

edit: Engines convert heat to rotation. It's the heat, not the hot. The hot part comes in as an efficiency limiting term. So hot is necessary, but you need a lot OF hot, which is heat. As Tweety Bird once said, the toot toot toot doesn't mean a hoot, it's the chug-a-lug-a-lug that makes it go.

[edit on 12-9-2007 by Tom Bedlam]

there is nothing new to it..
hydrogen is in the water and you need more energy to get it out than the burning of hydrogen delivers.

heat is good! if you have much heat it is better than less heart. use a stirling engine to turn heat into motion.
and a square inch of high temperature is as good as lesser heat with more area where it is affecting its surrounding. of course if this heat source is able to hold its temperature..

reply to post by Tom Bedlam


Thanks again.

I can imagine it gets frustrating explaining science 101 to a non scientist.

I am clear now on why heat is not energy and as a result why the salt water will not work as a fuel similar to gasoline.

My pleasure. If it's a GOOD way to separate the water into its constituents, then it's worth its weight in gold just because it's more efficient. So it's not that the thing is necessarily bad, or deceptive.

If it actually was OU somehow, that would be spectacular, but it would be more amazing than the discovery of quantum physics. So I'm not exactly holding my breath.

I never heard back from Dr Roy, so I guess he's not interested in joining the discussion. Occasionally, I can at least get a quote from one of these guys. It would be great to have one do a guest spot.

Obviously the man will be making a great contribution to scientific understanding in the future, when everyone figures out exactly what is going on.

When you consider his statement that he has driven his car 100 miles on four ounces of water; then that is a lot of energy being converted. I wish I could get 100 miles out of my vehicle on 4 ounces of gasoline. I can see why the USA military has had him convert over some of their hummers; and they are working.

If there is eight pounds of water in a gallon; thereby 128 ounces of water exists in that gallon. Meaning that for each gallon of water, getting 100 miles per 4 ounces, a gallon of water would take his same vehicle 3,200 miles. Now that is some energy conversion! On a 20 gallon tank of water that would convert to around 64,000 miles per tank of water.

I say... if it would cost $1,000 to get a tank of liquid converted over so that I could get comparable mileage, then I'll convert today!!!!!!!!!!

Obviously, if his vehicle can get 100 miles per gallon on four ounces of water; then someone should easily be able to gear their vehicle to run their transmission to convert transmission energy into electrical energy as you are driving down the road thereby producing the power to convert the energy from the water; thereby each vehicle could basically run itself if there was enough storage battery power to get the whole thing up and running in the first place.

No more stopping at the gas station. Just fill your gas tank with water now from your garden hose, and jump in and go for a drive, a 64,000 mile drive if you have a 20 gallon tank!

The prices of everything would come down, because the cost of transportation of stuff would drop tremendously. The cost of flying would drop tremendously also.

The USA government would not like this because of the taxes they get from fuel at the pump! The USA roads would need repair, and where would all of that tax money come from to fix the roads, and where will the USA government get all that revenue they lost when all the prices drop? Other governments will be hard pressed also, especially if they have been making a high percentage off of the sale of oil, or in refining it and then selling the fuel.

Sure asphalt will be cheap, because oil will be plentyful and people with oil wells will be shutting down their wells. People collecting oil revenue will not be collecting their money any more. Oil is BIG, and the taxes that come from it are HUGE. I'm not sure what percentage of the USA taxes comes directly or indirectly from oil, but it must be a HUGE chunk.

More and more people from the USA and the rest of the world would travel.

Naval submarines and ships of all types would love to convert over to running off of water.

This has far reaching aspects for the entire world. It will be great for each and every person on Earth individually, but it will be terrible for governments and big business who have always made their money off of oil. The bad thing is... they will want to raise taxes.

Bring on this new discovery, and lets change things so that you and I can enjoy life more.

You and I both know that the USA won't be going to war as much in the Middle East, because who would care about oil any more.

You won't have to be sending your sons to war and having them sent back in body bags because of oil in the Middle East.

Oil reserves would last longer and that is exactly what this world needs.

Global warming in thousands of years will have its chances lessened with this technology. I don't believe that mankind is currently causing global warming, I believe it is just an Earth phase, and a lot of peoples way of making a living if they can get governments to support their livelyhood.

Scientifically speaking, every machine that has grinding parts heats up over a period of time without oil; and the grinding plates of the Earth need that oil more than we do; to keep the Earth cool.

either way, with Quantum Mechanic/physics, many of the standard scientific laws that are in place are beginning to crumble, have loop-holes, or must be re-written because of anamolies. It seems now that nothing is impossible.

Interesting that it has moved from an eccentric Floridan to university exploration.
Something is going on, and the story is impossible to kill now. Anyone with an RF generator and some salt water can experiment with it.

Well, it sort of went from an eccentric Floridian to an eccentric Pennsylvanian, Dr Roy is definitely off the beaten path, although not so far that he's lost his tenure.

Ok - I got a sort of form letter response from Dr Roy on the subject:

Response to email and telephone communicators, who, regretfully, I
cannot answer individually

Re: Local observations of this phenomenon

I visited Mr. Kanzius' lab in Erie, PA and confirmed for myself the
demonstrations which he is seen performing in the original video clip
from the Cleveland TV Station. In addition, Mr. Kanzius brought his
relatively simple equipment to our (microwave) lab in the Materials
Research Lab at Penn State for the day. He explained his work, and the
process was demonstrated before some dozen senior faculty and research
personnel from various departments using our personnel, chemicals and
glassware.

It is clear that Mr. Kanzius has demonstrated the ability to dissociate
aqueous solutions of sodium chloride at normal sea water concentrations
into hydrogen and oxygen. Of course, it is the hydrogen and oxygen
(emerging from the water) which are being burned in the video, not the
water or NaCl. He has not made any attempt as far as we know to obtain
the data regarding the energy balance between input and output. Neither
The Pennsylvania State University nor I have any contractual
relationship with Mr. Kanzius as of this date.

Rustum Roy

reply to post by Tom Bedlam


So basically, until the guy mans up and does some actual science, we have no proof this is a viable or cost-effective way to perform electrolysis.


My opinion stands that this isn't more than a high tech parlor trick.

Bingo. But the fact that you can dissociate the water with time-varying magnetic fields is interesting.

And it could be an efficient way to do electrolysis. Or not - hard to say. With Kanzius off running little Stirling motors with it for showmanship, it's going to be tough to take anything he says seriously. Maybe Dr Roy and others can quantify the results with more science and less side-show.

Related Article Just sharing:

How stuff works - could salt water fuel cars?

reply to post by PhloydPhan


Do we actually know what the chemical reaction is though? Is it possible that the NaCl in the water is what is being broken down by this semi-electrolysis process (as opposed to the H2O being broken down), thus causing the Na to react with the H2O and burn?

I watched the video, he says "look at the white there and you can see the steam" maybe the white residue is actually some Hydrogen/Oxygen + Chlorine byproduct and not Sodium Chloride? Maybe it's Hydrochloric Acid?

I'm not a Chem buff by any means, but this seemed to me like the logical explanation... or else why would they be making such a big deal that it was salt water and not just any type of water? I watched another video where they actually MIX the salt water solution to be put into the test tube. I don't believe it's because they're demonstrating the fact that we can turn the most abundant resource on Earth into heat... I think it simply doesn't work without the salt at all.

My only explanation is that we're looking at a machine which provides the catalyst required to induce a chemical reaction from NaCL and H2O. Something like this perhaps?:

2NaCl + 2H2O --(by use of radio waves)-> 2NaOH + 2HCl

Sorry guys. It takes the same amount of energy to break down water as you get by recombining it. And in the real world, there are always losses.

Salt water is not a fuel.

At best, John Kanzius has found a novel way to break down water. That’s all.

Now maybe here were have a situation where there is more energy out than in. In that case you’re using up the NaCl in the process and will have to replace it. We’ve then essentially turned table salt into a kind of fuel. And I’ll bet that there are some toxic fumes produced by the reaction.

[edit on 2-11-2007 by NRen2k5]

If salt water isn't fuel, then explain Stan Meyer's water powered dune buggy:

www.youtube.com...



[edit on 3-11-2007 by dominicus]

reply to post by dominicus


If the sound on the clip is anything to go by, it's an internal combustion engine that's making the dune buggy move.

Originally posted by twitchy
Same technology, not salt water mind you, but yeah, you can run a car on it....
www.whydrogen.com...

Edit:
More information...
HHO Gas (google Video)

[edit on 8-7-2007 by twitchy]

I like that one. Runs on water or water and gas but a specially energized
water HHO but not H2O.

Doesn't he say he uses a special Tesla coil.

The original, Ford Model T, Tesla ignition coil was too powerful and was
replaced. This guy might be using one of those original coils.

Ford engineers told him it ran on air and Ford told his Illuminati friends
to start steeling designs from Tesla and keeping them secret.
Perhaps Ford invested in Germany to develop a few items.

Powerful coils do powerful things...like spark the air.
If the FOO is true, Tesla must sue.

Originally posted by dominicus
If salt water isn't fuel, then explain Stan Meyer's water powered dune buggy:

www.youtube.com...

Gladly. It’s a hoax. It’s being powered by something other than water. Probably gasoline.

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne

Originally posted by twitchy
Same technology, not salt water mind you, but yeah, you can run a car on it....
www.whydrogen.com...

Edit:
More information...
HHO Gas (google Video)

[edit on 8-7-2007 by twitchy]

I like that one. Runs on water or water and gas but a specially energized
water HHO but not H2O.

Doesn't he say he uses a special Tesla coil.

The original, Ford Model T, Tesla ignition coil was too powerful and was
replaced. This guy might be using one of those original coils.

Ford engineers told him it ran on air and Ford told his Illuminati friends
to start steeling designs from Tesla and keeping them secret.
Perhaps Ford invested in Germany to develop a few items.

Powerful coils do powerful things...like spark the air.
If the FOO is true, Tesla must sue.

That’s a nice story. Any basis in reality?

[edit on 3-11-2007 by NRen2k5]

reply to post by NRen2k5

Wow---but I doubt anyone is postulating over-unity, but if a way to much more efficiently "split the water molecule" is discovered, say perhaps at a cost less than the cost to produce the same amount of energy equivalent in a equal quantity of oil, then it becomes more cost effective than hydrocarbons---and much, much more plentiful.
Remember, uranium was just a heavy rock not so long ago.