Re: The instant solution to global warming, zero energy (no yeah right, hydrogen combustion)

On Feb 2, 11:19 am, gb6...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Feb 2, 10:24 am, gb6...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:





On Feb 2, 8:45 am, "dlzc" <d...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear gb6...:

Off topic in sci.astro. Adding sci.chem

On Feb 2, 7:54 am, gb6...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Zero energy is available.

Hydrogen can be extracted out of air using electrolysis
using the car's battery

About 60% loss of applied energy doing this.

The 60 percent loss applies only if its electric.

Hydrogen can be used to replace gasolene in ordinary cars. This is
trivial,
but you have to use your brain.

As trivial it means that we all should understand.

You have probably heard of hydrogen combustion engine. There are two
types of hydrogen engines. When oxygen and hydrogen mixes, electricity
is produced. There are busses in Chicago that use this technology, and
the electricity produced runs these busses. Here the 60 percent energy
efficiency is true. Here when oxygen and hydrogen is mixed, a product
aside from electricity is water. This is a beautiful and silent
technology, and relies on the transportation of hydrogen as fuel.

The second, and the most ignored version of a hydrogen based engine,
is hydrogen combustion. Hydrogen is gas that burns and works perfectly
with most traditional car engines.

What I ask as a preservation of technology, is based on my trivial
understanding that hydrogen using electricity can be extracted from
water, and water can be extracted from the air using electricity, as a
waste product of air conditioners.

The possibility is there for an engine that
extracts hydrogen from the air using a car's battery, and uses that
hydrogen as a replacement to gasoline.

I have extracted a liter of water in one minute using an air
conditioner.

Electrolysis using a car's battery produces instant hydrogen, which
can be directly directed to the car's engine for combustion.
In fact this is so simple, that a car mechanic could do it very
cheaply. In East Europe a lot of people cheat by installing propaine
tanks in their cars as a cheaper means of gas, as gasoline in Europe
is expensive. A car with a traditional engine could also take
hydrogen, and hydrogen can be very easily extracted using electricity
and electrolysis.

+------------------------+
| |
| Traditional car engine |<---+
| | |
+------------------------+ |
| |
| |
+-------------+ |
| + - | |
| produces | |
| electricity | |H
| (battery) | |
+-------------+ |
| \ |
| \ |
+-----------------+ +--------------+
| | | electrolysis |
| air conditioner | | produces |
| produces water |-->| hydrogen gas |
| | | from water |
+-----------------+ +--------------+

Upon starting up the car, one might see the battery starting
electrolysis, and instantly hydrogen gas is produced.
Then as the gas moves to the engine, the engine can start up using the
instant generation of hydrogen gas from water, and water from air.
What people don't see, is how effective extracting water from air and
hydrogen from water is.

Free energy ideas are generally dismissed, as so many tried and failed
in general. This concept is zero energy (self sufficient), meaning the
energy power is in the burning of hydrogen, but to extract hydrogen
from the air reaquires less energy, than what this engine produces by
burning hydrogen.

What this means is that hydrogen would not need to be transported as
oil. Hydrogen is extracted in place, by a car, by a device that
produces energy placed near a home, the energy becomes taking it
directly from the air, and by trivial means of extracting hydrogen
from the air and burning it. It means the collapse of the global
economy, as this technology is so simple, that an ordinary car
mechanic could do. It means politics, but it is also important, that
it is not patented away from all people, a preservation and government
control is needed for this technology.

Al Gore is interested in solutions that benefit all people, that
tackles global warming, solutions that also benefit the world. I
believe this is one of the interested solution available for research.

(first water waste from air conditioners, then
electrolysis separates hydrogen from the air

... water ...

and sends the hydrogen gas directly to the engine.)

Grinds to a halt really quick. Because you do not consider real
inefficiencies.

Ok. Why should we believe till we see it. Why should we see it,
if we don't want to believe it.

The problem is comparing the energy to a car.

I extracted one liter of water using a POWERFUL air conditioner
in one minute, a car has a tiny air conditioner compared to
one that cools a house.

One liter of water in one minute sounds cool.

If this would be gas, one liter of gas can run a car on a highway
for 5 minutes, given the car runs at 120 kilometers an hour
and the car consumes 10 kilometers per liter. (In US terms,
22 miles per gallon or so).

One liter of gas can be used up in 5 minutes, but in one minute,
But in five minutes, I was only able to produce 5 liters of water,
given a good powerful air conditioner.

Now the other problem, is that one needs a 5 times larger gas
tank for LIQUID hydrogen than for oil. It means, that that 5 liters
of water only means one, and it is not liquid hydrogen but water.

So we are not efficient, and the air conditioner for extracting
that amount of water may be far too powerful for a car's battery.

But there is belief, even if this is too complex, and yet trivial.

No. See I fooled myself. The five times greater tank applies
if hydrogen is used to produce electricity by mixing with oxygen.

We are talking about burning hydrogen, which is a lot more
powerful than electricity.

Keep in mind.

.

Relevant Pages
Loading