What happens when water is burned as fuel?

Question

oil derivatives inefficiently used as fuel pollutes the atmosphere, and is said to be diminishing in supply, alternatives are being develop, but using oxygen or hydrogen to propel engines from water, wouldn't this use the water out of supply in the future? Are this element renewable when "burned"?

Answer 1

The problem with water as a fuel is that it is so hard to keep lit..

Answer 2

last time I looked you couldn't 'burn' water... so your question is moot.

Answer 3

Water does not burn and cannot be used as a fuel.  Thus, when you try, nothing happens.

Answer 4

Water doesn't burn.

You are trying to do this:

Water ----->  Equal amount of water + Energy.

"Nothing is free."

Answer 5

Well fred you are right, but the entire "Hydrogen Argument" depends on how the hydrogen is produced.

If we are idiots and use gasoline or coal generated energy to produce hydrogen to them burn in cars then we will be using more energy and producing more pollutants than just burning gasoline.

Now on the flip side of that argument, if we use solar power, or wind power to generate the electricity to separate the oxygen and hydrogen, then it is a much more efficient process which is much better for the environment.

so the debate shouldnt be weather or not hydrogen is good, because it is a good source of energy, but the debate should be about how to generate that hydrogen.

Answer 6

no. water can be easily broken down today (as in iceland or greenland) into hydrogen to burn. they are doing it in many places on a small scale. their is no pollution cause by burning hydrogen. only heat and a little water comes out of  the exhaust. it is slow to be done beause, primarly, changing out the distribution system of pumps (present-day gas stattions) will be very costly and take years. the only other consideration is  a lot of measures to use it safely. hydrogen, if you didn't already know, is far more combustionable  than gasoline. lots of failsafes and protective valves and such must be perfected. the hiendenburg was filled with hydrogen when it exploded you may recall. but that was then.

Answer 7

When people talk about using water as fuel, what they really are talking about is separating the hydrogen and oxygen electrolytically, and then burning the hydrogen.

When hydrogen is burned it reacts with oxygen in the atmosphere to form water.

The actual emissions from the burning of hydrogen is steam which condenses back to water.

The water that you used to make the fuel is created again when the hydrogen is burned.

It takes approximately 50 kilowatt hours of electricity to produce an amount of hydrogen with the energy equivalent of one gallon of gasoline.

Answer 8

Hydrogen can be *burned* for fuel.  It combines with oxygen to form water vapor.  The problem is that it takes as much energy to separate the hydrogen from oxygen in water molecules as is given off by using the hydrogen as fuel.  The water is broken into hydrogen and oxygen by zapping it with electricity.  The problem is most electricity in the USA is produced by burning fossil fuels so there is no real net savings in pollution by using hydrogen as a fuel source.

Answer 9

sorry goldspinner...

Conservation of energy says that you can't get more energy burning H2 than you had to use to produce the H2 in the first place.

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.  It can only be changed from one form to another.

Until you learn and believe that.  You are doomed to mass misconceptions.

H2 as an energy storage medium is not really efficient either.  First you have to make the electricity to do the separation of H2 and O2 out of water... Producing electricity is at best 90% efficient.  Then you burn the H2 and internal combustion engines are very inefficient.  Fuel cells are better, but still have heat losses and then you have the losses involved in using the electricity produced with the fuel cell...

H2+02 fuel cells make sense for the space program.  But are prohibitively expensive for anything else.

Answer 10

you would have to have an alternate energy source to operate your operation, like solar power and so you are using 2 alternate sources for 1 operation and I think that because of availability and convenience as well as the initial cost to get these ideas underway is the main reason why we aren't doing them now but yes, I hope we can come to a solution soon