Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 General Skepticism
 A viable energy source? hydrogen from water..
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard

3192 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  10:25:07  Show Profile Send BigPapaSmurf a Private Message  Reply with Quote
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18700750/

Read this article about a method of creating hydrogen and aluminum oxide from water+an aluminum alloy, strangly it doesnt seem the least bit implausable to me.

It says this system would create the hydrogen for your car inside the fuel tank and could be retrofitted onto existing cars with only minor modifications. Neat Stuff!

"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History

"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4955 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  10:56:26   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Interesting stuff, though it still seems like we're some ways off from the real deal. His persecution complex about "big egos" is sort of lame, though:
'Remember that Einstein was a patent examiner and had no funding for his 1905 miracle year,' Woodall added. 'He did it on his own time. If he had been a professor at a university in the U.S. today and put in a proposal to develop the theory of special relativity it would have been summarily rejected.'
I don't think Einstein needed what is certainly in the neighborhood of a million dollar grant to come up with Special Relativity-- and why compare yourself to Einstein? Oh, wait...
Go to Top of Page

BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard

3192 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  11:02:45   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send BigPapaSmurf a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Yeah its a typical reaction of someones whos been shot down...

As far as anti-cheap energy conspiracies go though Big Oil is a 100+ billion dollar industry and would have plenty of reason to try to stop this type of stuff with their massive influance...(plays mysterious conspiracy music)

This guy clearly is more quailfied than most of the cheap-energy crackpots on the 'index...

"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History

"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini
Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 05/18/2007 13:11:48
Go to Top of Page

pleco
SFN Addict

USA
2998 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  11:55:12   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit pleco's Homepage Send pleco a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Why would Einstein "have been summarily rejected"?

by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart.
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4955 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  12:01:16   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by pleco

Why would Einstein "have been summarily rejected"?
Because anyone with revolutionary ideas is always rejected by the establishment. And so anyone who is rejected must have a viable revolutionary idea. Didn't you know that?
Go to Top of Page

furshur
SFN Regular

USA
1536 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  12:13:24   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send furshur a Private Message  Reply with Quote
It sounds pausible. I never thought about it, but I guess that hydrogen is usually produced when a metal corrodes into a oxide. If this reaction is FAST enough to supply the hydrogen in sufficient quantities it should work. I would suppose there are problems like flushing the tank to remove the aluminum oxide sludge. I don't know how expensive gallium is or if it is a toxic material (which would make the aluminum sludge a hazardous waste), but I say more power to em if we get away from oil.


If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know.
Go to Top of Page

pleco
SFN Addict

USA
2998 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  12:18:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit pleco's Homepage Send pleco a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by furshur

It sounds pausible. I never thought about it, but I guess that hydrogen is usually produced when a metal corrodes into a oxide. If this reaction is FAST enough to supply the hydrogen in sufficient quantities it should work. I would suppose there are problems like flushing the tank to remove the aluminum oxide sludge. I don't know how expensive gallium is or if it is a toxic material (which would make the aluminum sludge a hazardous waste), but I say more power to em if we get away from oil.




As of 2006, the current price for 1 kg gallium of 99.9999% purity seems to be at about 400 US$.

Of course, I don't know how many miles you would get on 1 kg...

While not considered toxic, the data about gallium is inconclusive. Some sources suggest that it may cause dermatitis from prolonged exposure; other tests have not caused a positive reaction. Like most metals, finely divided gallium loses its luster. Powdered gallium appears gray. When gallium is handled with bare hands, the extremely fine dispersion of liquid gallium droplets which results from wetting skin with the metal may appear as a gray skin stain.

by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart.
Go to Top of Page

BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard

3192 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  13:11:05   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send BigPapaSmurf a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Still any waste would be contained and not released as exaust.

Though JFK told me that extensive gallium use will lead to a massive ice age which would destroy the Universe.

"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History

"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini
Go to Top of Page

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  13:55:23   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Tin foil (I assume aluminum foil works as well?), Drano (sodium hydroxide, NaOH), and water...we used to fill balloons with H2 all the time as kids.

Apparently if you cap the bottle instead you get a Drano bomb.

But my question about this process is what weight and bulk of these pellets are they talking about?

Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  15:07:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Isn't this essentially releasing energy from the chemical breakdown of aluminum, which is itself produced from the application of notoriously huge amounts of electrical energy to molten bauxite? (Boeing was originally located in the Pacific Northwest due to the availability there of large amounts of hydro-generation to produce aluminum.)

Can someone here possibly factor into this the electrical energy required to produce the aluminum in the first place? At best, wouldn't this invention just be in effect the release the energy "stored" by the refining of the aluminum in the first place? I suspect this is far from being a "free energy" solution, though it might in effect become a sort of secondary battery.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4955 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  15:35:48   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by HalfMooner

Isn't this essentially releasing energy from the chemical breakdown of aluminum, which is itself produced from the application of notoriously huge amounts of electrical energy to molten bauxite? (Boeing was originally located in the Pacific Northwest due to the availability there of large amounts of hydro-generation to produce aluminum.)

Can someone here possibly factor into this the electrical energy required to produce the aluminum in the first place? At best, wouldn't this invention just be in effect the release the energy "stored" by the refining of the aluminum in the first place? I suspect this is far from being a "free energy" solution, though it might in effect become a sort of secondary battery.


Well, in the article he addressed it the cost of making the aluminum:
That cost could come way down, he figures, if the recycling is done with electricity from nuclear power plants, wind turbines or even solar power plants if economically viable. The aluminum oxide and gallium would be shipped to such plants, using electrolysis to break the oxide back down to aluminum, Woodall said, "and we start the cycle all over again."
As for the bulk, BSG, I think the article said 350 pounds worth of pellets.
Go to Top of Page

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  21:15:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by HalfMooner

Isn't this essentially releasing energy from the chemical breakdown of aluminum, which is itself produced from the application of notoriously huge amounts of electrical energy to molten bauxite? (Boeing was originally located in the Pacific Northwest due to the availability there of large amounts of hydro-generation to produce aluminum.)

Can someone here possibly factor into this the electrical energy required to produce the aluminum in the first place? At best, wouldn't this invention just be in effect the release the energy "stored" by the refining of the aluminum in the first place? I suspect this is far from being a "free energy" solution, though it might in effect become a sort of secondary battery.


A'hem..HM, if you broke down Aluminum you'd get a much bigger blast than a Drano bomb.

I do believe the Al (hint: atomic #13), is a catalyst for the release of H2.
...use an aluminum alloy to extract hydrogen from water ...
Edited by - beskeptigal on 05/18/2007 21:20:29
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  22:03:13   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Excuse me, Be, I should not have written "chemical breakdown of aluminum." I meant its oxidation, as it takes oxygen from the water molecules, releasing hydrogen. Isn't that what the process is doing, rather than the Al being a "pure," unchanged catalyst?

Cune, that sounds very much like a primary battery to me, though one whose material may be recycled by adding energy. This all reminds me very much of the aluminum-air battery, which has been a difficult goal for many years.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26022 Posts

Posted - 05/18/2007 :  23:51:39   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
It takes a boatload of energy to break apart water molecules, whether you do it directly (like electrolysis) or indirectly (like this aluminum deal). So all this scheme is doing is taking the big energy outlay and moving it back a step. In other words, instead of having a huge power plant in your car doing electrolysis on water to get Hydrogen (what a waste that would be), they're putting the big power plant off your car and in a... well... big power plant somewhere.

The addition of massive amounts of energy to split the water stills exists, in this system it just exists in mining and refining the aluminum ore in the first place, and in the "recycling" of the spent aluminum fuel pellets later. The aluminum is just acting like a big battery.

Effectively, what they're proposing is splitting Hydrogen from water, and then recombining that Hydrogen with Oxygen to get the energy they pumped into splitting the water back out. But this sort of thing is dreadfully inefficient, with lots of energy simply getting lost as heat.

So what it boils down to is this: does the net energy storage of 350 pounds of aluminum-gallium pellets, once all the inefficiencies are totalled up, exceed the net energy storage of 350 of the world's best batteries? I suspect it doesn't, and that's why the DOE isn't interested.

Yes, I understand that batteries would also require swapping out the engine and transmission and making lots of other modifications to a car, but those are one-time costs. But ignore that anyway: does the net energy stored in 350 pounds of pellets (plus an unknown quantity of water) meet or exceed the energy stored in 350 pounds of raw hydrogen? Because if modifying an engine to run on hydrogen is so easy, then that would be the benchmark the aluminum system has to beat. There are, of course, safety issues with a 350-pound tank of hydrogen, but are they serious enough to warrant a dramatic reduction in energy efficiency? And, of course, there is very little hydrogen infrastucture around, but there are zero "aluminum stations" in the world.

There are all sorts of factors that need to be considered besides the ones mentioned above. My bet would be that the DOE examined the energy equations of this aluminum system and realized there are already other systems in the works or in existence which exceed the joules-per-gram value of aluminum, whatever it may be.

Because splitting water and then putting it back together again is hard, wasteful work.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.17 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000