GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
822 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This isn't exactly "breaking" news but I had never seen it before and after a quick search, I didn't find it on GMI so I thought I would share it.
Michael O'mara @ WKYC said:
Here are the basics of John's idea:

Radio-waves will heat certain metals. Tiny bits of a gold or carbon are injected into a cancer patient.

Those nano-particals can be guided by special targeting molecules to the abnormalities of the cancer cells and ignore the healthy cells.

The patient is then exposed to radio waves and only the cancer cells contaning the nanotubes heat up and die.

But John Kanzius has also stumbled upon yet another extrordinary breakthrough.

His machine could actually make saltwater burn.
http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=68227
^full story at link^

http://www.wkyc.com/video/player.aspx?sid=68227&aid=35660
^Link to Video Story^
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
822 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
That is what I was wondering because they didn't discuss it in the video; How much electricty was used to get a flame that big out of salt water?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,019 Posts
That is what I was wondering because they didn't discuss it in the video; How much electricty was used to get a flame that big out of salt water?

Well I don't know the specifics, but you can't get out more energy than you put in. Water doesn't have chemical bonds that store energy the way gasoline does (and is easily released under high temperature).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,193 Posts
Well I don't know the specifics, but you can't get out more energy than you put in. Water doesn't have chemical bonds that store energy the way gasoline does (and is easily released under high temperature).
Yes, but water is H20. There are two hydrogen molecules and one oxygen and both of these in there gaseous state are very powerful. Especially the oxygen. At least that is what I was taught. Is this wrong?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,019 Posts
Yes, but water is H20. There are two hydrogen molecules and one oxygen and both of these in there gaseous state are very powerful. Especially the oxygen. At least that is what I was taught. Is this wrong?
You are right, hydrogen gas is very combustible. But when it burns, it combines with oxygen. The result is water, which is the "low-energy" state. (It's been a while since I took chemistry in college so I may not be explaining this very well.)

In other words, water is the result of the combustion, just as car exhaust is the result of gasoline combustion. Trying to use water as fuel is just like trying to use car exhaust as fuel. It can't be done because the energy has already been extracted.

In this case, he is using an energy input (radio waves) to bring the water to a high energy state so the molecules will break apart, and then the gases burn. There is no way for that to be efficient because you have to put in at least as much energy as you get out.

As wise men have said before me, "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
822 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Why isn't this demonstration done with plain water instead of salt water?
Does the salt change anything?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,193 Posts
Why isn't this demonstration done with plain water instead of salt water?
Does the salt change anything?
Yes, the salt is what vibrates and separates the H20 into HHO gas. No salt, no vibration, no gas, only hot water.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,193 Posts
You are right, hydrogen gas is very combustible. But when it burns, it combines with oxygen. The result is water, which is the "low-energy" state. (It's been a while since I took chemistry in college so I may not be explaining this very well.)

In other words, water is the result of the combustion, just as car exhaust is the result of gasoline combustion. Trying to use water as fuel is just like trying to use car exhaust as fuel. It can't be done because the energy has already been extracted.

In this case, he is using an energy input (radio waves) to bring the water to a high energy state so the molecules will break apart, and then the gases burn. There is no way for that to be efficient because you have to put in at least as much energy as you get out.

As wise men have said before me, "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch."
Well, this is what confuses me. It is commonly known that hydrogen is expensive to "make," but there is a significant amount of unused energy around us everyday. There is no reason to transport hydrogen anywhere because it can be made locally. You can even make it at home. Why can't a solar panel or small home sized windmill be used to power the electrolysis of the water to make hydrogen? You don't have to make a lot at once either. If a Chevy Equinox fuel cell vehicle will get you 200 miles per charge it should last at least one week if not longer. This would give your home charging station one to two weeks to use solar power (or a home sized wind mill which is even more powerful) to power the electrolysis. Then all your paying for is water. And an initial investment on you alternative energy resources.

Here's another question. How much hydrogen can be extracted from water with 120V at 15A in an hour? I know this is a very technical question, but shouldn't an overnight electrolysis make enough hydrogen for a 200 mile charge? Which would mean that a 200 mile hydrogen trip would cost you as much as a 40 mile charge for an all electric Volt right?

A full charge of an Equinox is about 4.08Kg. I know 4.08Kg of hydrogen sounds like a lot, but there is about 10Kg of hydrogen per gallon of water. It doesn't sound like you need very much energy to use hydrogen to drive your vehicle.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top