• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Possible new energy source?

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

What is most surprising about this is that it appears science itself was surprised by it. If that's really true (if this priniciple isn't already known) then all those chemistry and chemical engineering PhDs are a sloppy bunch of thinkers, sorry to say.

I hope they get can the process more efficient. It sure isn't creating much energy at the moment. I also hope the patent isn't bought by some large petrochemical company and never heard from again.
 
Brian Now said:
What is most surprising about this is that it appears science itself was surprised by it. If that's really true (if this priniciple isn't already known) then all those chemistry and chemical engineering PhDs are a sloppy bunch of thinkers, sorry to say.

I hope they get can the process more efficient. It sure isn't creating much energy at the moment. I also hope the patent isn't bought by some large petrochemical company and never heard from again.
Click to expand...

It just shows how dogmatic our scientific establishment is at the moment. They can't think out of the box and they have to bash any new ideas that seem to defy what is currently known. It seems to be all up to the engineers and scientists who are working out of their garages to come out with these new breakthroughs that will get us out out of oil addiction and middle east quagmire.
I truly hope that something will come out of this and Petro industry will not put a stop to it. At this point, I'll take anything that can potentially replace gasoline. Really sick and tired of paying over 3 bucks a gallon.
 
truthseeker said:
At this point, I'll take anything that can potentially replace gasoline. Really sick and tired of paying over 3 bucks a gallon.
Click to expand...

LOL - don't come to the UK - we're paying $9.00 for gallon over here...

Anybody tried making one of Stan Meyers' water-to-hydrogen convertors? His entire research, including schematics and circuit diagrams can be downloaded for free in pdf format...he's dead now, so I guess someone else has to continue the work...

...alternatively, what about a 'joe' cell?
 
You can bank on some company buying it up, to ensure that it will NEVER be made.
 
Rick Deckard said:
truthseeker said:
At this point, I'll take anything that can potentially replace gasoline.
Anybody tried making one of Stan Meyers' water-to-hydrogen convertors? His entire research, including schematics and circuit diagrams can be downloaded for free in pdf format...he's dead now, so I guess someone else has to continue the work...

...alternatively, what about a 'joe' cell?
Click to expand...
I intend to build a Myers type cell sometime, but it's down a long list of projects that are behind schedule.

What bothers me about this story above is that none of the news items about it even mentions the Stan Myers story, which has video available and everything.

Keep everyone divided and confused. First order of battle.
Click to expand...
 
truthseeker said:
Looks really interesting.

Click to expand...

I can make water burn too. Split H2O into hydrogen and oxygen, and then ignite the result. The only problem is that it takes energy to split H2O, and due to the second law of thermodynamics you get less "work" out of such a system then you put in.

Splitting water can be a way of storing energy though, which is what the whole hydrogen car mania was about. But the efficiency stinks... you get much better overall efficiency by charging and discharging LiIon batteries.

The media gets the distinction between producing and storing energy wrong all the time. My laptop's batteries can power my laptop, but they are are storage cells not power plants. The difference is in the overall thermodynamic cycle in effect. A power plant is something that consumes a fuel at lower entropy and emits a waste at higher entropy and translates the difference into work, or something that collects energy incoming from another source (e.g. the sun) and converts it into work. (The sun in turn is converting matter into energy... consuming a fuel... it just has a lot of it and is doing E=mc^2!)

If H2O/NaCl solution wasn't at ground energy state at standard temperatures and pressures, the entire Earth would have exploded a long time ago.
 
Back
Top