err....... actually how much of energy is needed to convert water to H2 O2?

237,1300 Joules per mole: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/electrol.html

 

The reason water is considered an "ash" is it is the waste byproduct of burning hydrogen. As in rechargable batteries the reaction is reversable, at a energy cost.

I'm looking forward to commercial fuel cells (which has nothing to do with hydrogen generators, another term that has been misappropriated), where hydrogen and oxygen are combined chemically (not burned, I think) to produce electricity directly. NASA is real fond of using them, so they are practical, but expensive (platinum and paladium are necessary to build them, I think).

When I say I think, I'm say this is my opinion, and not fact.

 

Maybe it's long winded, but given that there isn't any such thing as HHO (and I regularly see it posted as if it were a real molecule) I think I would loose it.

In short, the whole term HHO is misleading, and I believe it was meant to be so. Declaring it is not a chemical doesn't work, if you insist on using standard chemical convention to describe it.

I haven't read all the links, so might be at a disadvantage here. My guess is that HHO is just another way to write H2O (the 2 indicates two hydrogen atoms).

 

Check this one out, which was an indirect reply to this one.

So far this thread has been entertaining (as in worth reading). Linchiek positions have been pretty reasonable.

 

Yup water is to H2 as Ash is to wood.
The energy used to convert water back to hydrogen and oxygen will of coarse always be more than you would get back when you burn them... entropy wins again.....

 

You can't win.
You can't break even.
You can't quit.

Ought to be my tag line. Another quote by a famous physist whose name I can't remember.

 

237,1300 Joules per mole: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/electrol.html

thnx 4 da link...!

 

]The reason water is considered an "ash" is it is the waste byproduct of burning hydrogen.[/U] As in rechargable batteries the reaction is reversable, at a energy cost.

I'm looking forward to commercial fuel cells (which has nothing to do with hydrogen generators, another term that has been misappropriated), where hydrogen and oxygen are combined chemically (not burned, I think) to produce electricity directly. NASA is real fond of using them, so they are practical, but expensive (platinum and paladium are necessary to build them, I think).

When I say I think, I'm say this is my opinion, and not fact.

noted...! TQ!

 

WikiQuote attributes it to CP Snow:

A common scientific joke, as stated by C. P. Snow, expresses the four laws simply and surprisingly accurately as:

Zeroth: "You must play the game."
First: "You can't win."
Second: "You can't break even."
Third: "You can't quit the game."

Or, it could be from the Michael Jackson hit song.

John

 

My father-in-law used to teach chemistry at the University of Washington. His interpretation was:

1) You can't get something for nothing.
2) You can only break even at absolute zero.
3) You can never get to absolute zero.

 

think out of the box, man...!

 

It's one thing to think outside the box, but blind folly to totally ignore the basic laws of physics.

 

I'm looking forward to some real numbers myself. Reading Linchieks posts posts we might actually get something.

 

Don't really need to look at the numbers to realize your are loosing energy, as heat. Both separating the water, and burning the gases, release a lot of energy as heat. that isn't used for anything. This is main reason you will never break even, a good portion of your efforts are wasted. Nothing wrong with dreaming, perhaps eventually someone will stumble on something to make use of the wasted heat energy. But right now, it's mostly hype and snake oil. People want cheap power, so anything virtually free is very attractive.

 

Yep, but without real numbers it is hard to refute. The myths on this abound in the lack of real evidence, and most people simply slept through their science classes in high school, so they really don't get it. It is a lot of work doing this, more than I am willing to try, but if someone else does it I'm willing to listen to the results.

There is the slight chance something is happening, such as a catalytic process, that is increasing the effeciency of the gasoline burn. I don't believe it, but I'd like to see some real numbers for a change. The whole process is so inefficient that even a minor increase could go a long way.

 

Comic books aside, there simply aren't any magic bullets. Like all gold rushes the guys who come out ahead are the shop keepers who sell the shovels and the pans.

 

Nothing wrong with dreaming, perhaps eventually someone will stumble on something to make use of the wasted heat energy. But right now, it's mostly hype and snake oil. People want cheap power, so anything virtually free is very attractive.

Harvey, I believe you've pinpointed the crux of the mater. Folk view hydrogen from water as "free," not realizing the process costs more than what we pay for gasoline in the US. A hobbyist with good skills, charging $0 for their time, might get away with paying a little more than they would for gasoline. A newcomer might pay three to four times the price of US gasoline.

Of course, gasoline is realatively inexpensive in the US... http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_gas_pri-energy-gasoline-prices

But so too, is electricity: http://www.solarbuzz.com/Solarpricesworld.htm

 

Like all gold rushes the guys who come out ahead are the shop keepers who sell the shovels and the pans.

Hmm... How evil of me would it be to sell variable-frequency, variable-PW, solder-it-yourself kits for moderately exorbitant prices?

 

Hmm... How evil of me would it be to sell variable-frequency, variable-PW, solder-it-yourself kits for moderately exorbitant prices?

Since the circuit could be used for other things, such as variable speed control for cordless tools, or DC motors in general, light dimmer, probably a few other things. Might actually be a useful instrument for the workbench. Leave the application and the price tag up to the purchaser. They have the choice of buying from you, or making their own. The hydrogen guys will already know your kit is what they are looking for, and somebody is going to get their money. No, I don't think it would be evil, except maybe charging $200 for a $10 bag of parts and a home etched PC board...

 

Hmm... How evil of me would it be to sell variable-frequency, variable-PW, solder-it-yourself kits for moderately exorbitant prices?

A stock broker wouldn't even think of that question. Guess you are not one.

John