Burning water: Now that we know water can be used as a fuel.....?

Question

Does this mean that scientist will actually develope the technology so that it can be used by society or will it fall into obscrurity so that we can continue to rely on OPEC?

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07252/815920-85.stm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070910/ap_on_sc/burning_seawater

Answer 1

No, the water is not a fuel.

The radiofrequency generator requires a substantial amount of energy to run.

It takes substantially more electrical energy to produce the radiowaves than you get back when you burn the hydrogen.

You are merely using the hydrogen as a device to store the electrical energy.  Unfortunately that storage is relatively inefficient.  You could have used the same energy to charge a battery. The battery is much more efficient at storing electrical energy compared with using that electrical energy to produce elemental Hydrogen and Oxygen.

Answer 2

Check out these sites.  Lots of information on alternate technologies.  People have actually lost their lives to keep this information from the public.

Answer 3

You spelled Stephen wrong.

Answer 4

I am pretty sure we already knew this since we had steam engines for centuries.  Steam is the vapor form of water right?!??!?

Answer 5

i know this is impossible to do,but if there was a way to pass the word for americans nationally to refuse to fill up their tanks,call in sick for a whole week,perform body sit downs at entrances in front of gas stations,filling up jails in this political season,someone is bound to start talking about this

Answer 6

They are not burning the water - they are separating out the hydrogen from the H2O.

Answer 7

If they did start to develop cars to run off of saltwater, they would most likely find some way to hike up prices, I doubt that it will ever get going, it will take another 5 -10 years if it does. Maybe people should start building their own cars.

Answer 8

The articles don't say much.  This person powers up a radio frequency generator and is able to split the water molecule and make hydrogen.  The same thing can be done by simply applying an electrical current in water.  However scientists have long known that you remove much less fuel from the split water molecules than it took to split them in their first place.  This articles doesn't sound encouraging.  It sounds like its likely that this is another inefficient means of making hydrogen.  Until science can come up with a cheap efficient means of making and storing hydrogen, the "hydrogen economy" will only be a dream.

Answer 9

He is using radio waves to break down the bond between Hydrogen and Oxygen in the water and it is the Hydrogen that burns I have not yet seen any details of the power required by the transmitter as a ratio to how much power is extracted from the water

but I suspect it is fairly high

An alternative method of doing this is by electrolysis which seems a far more cost effective method but I will be interested to see how he goes on with his discovery

By the way blank Steven is an alternative spelling

Answer 10

As long as OPEC pays off politicians, this will always be a problem.

Answer 11

This is not buring water as a fuel.  It is simply another way to break water up into hydrogen and oxygen and them burn the hydrogen.  Hydrogen, not water, is the fuel.  Like all hydrogen production technology, this requires an input in energy.  In this case in the form of radio frequency electromagnetic radiation.  This energy must come from somewhere, most likely a near by power plant.  The energy produced when the hydrogen is burned will always be less than the energy input to produce the hydrogen.  This is mandated by the second law of thermodynamics.  Note that this is a law, not a theory or a hypothesis.  Unlike man made laws, this one cannot be broken as it is ordained by what ever power controls the physical universe.

Answer 12

You are misunderstanding the articles. And the people who write them don't know what they are talking about. Talk is cheap and action on this idea is nonexistent because it is IMPOSSIBLE to do. It takes more energy to make hydrogen from water than you can produce by burning the hydrogen.

Answer 13

Well, there are many approaches to use water as a fuel. But water itself can not burn.

I have made many researches on this matter, and I found many things...

The true fact of consuming water as a fuel is to break it into Hydrogen and Oxygen, even if not separated gases (the brownian gas), it can be burnt smokeless, high temperature, flame-less and quick.

Another fact is that breaking water molecules is very energy consuming. There are many equipment to do so, but their energy is not sufficient to move a car as a stand-alone source of energy.

There is a long long path to go, to use this material as a source of energy. We have to wait until we can find a cheap and easy way to produce hydrogen, and use water as a vast and useful source.

Now we can suppose there is a way to burn water. it uses radio frequency to do so, and RF goes anywhere. Also human body consists of water, such invention has a long raod to prove its not harmful for your body, and the fact that it shall burns water only in engine, not the water in passengers' bodies!!!

Answer 14

It means the oil companies will be climbing all over themselves trying to buy the patent for this, so they can sit on it and enjoy their current gas prices.

I doubt we'll see a whole lot on this, atleast not for many years. Only when prices are so ridiculous that the average person is nearly unable to afford to drive.

Answer 15

Hey, you can do it TODAY!  Don't go to the gas station, just pee in your gas tank !!!  Don't let OPEC decide what you can burn in YOUR car.