Blood Sucking Oil Companys and Bush

[Smee]

I'd still like to have a '69 Dodge Charger Daytona with a 440 Magnum...

Or a Shelby Cobra with a 429.

Personally preferred my '69 Roadrunner with 383 Magnum over my '69 GTX with 440 Magnum (might have been the auto tranny in the GTX) . . . but you couldn't beat the looks of them Cobras!!!

Anyways, alternatives to petroleum are being worked on all the time.

Two Aussies have a claim of developing a 1KW/hour generator which uses only 1/5 as much power as it consumes:



Here is a plan for a fuel cell to produce "on demand" hydrogen:



Stan Meyers, back in the 1990's, had developed a unique way of converting water to HHO:



and used a variation in a car that ran only on water:



Of course, there is a price for messin with the oil companies . . .

someone else claims to be able to burn salt water:



I personally don't know if any of these work, but will be messin around with the HHO a little bit. Already use the process to clean crud off of coins that have coroded, except I've just been letting the gas escape. Might be a great way to combine a hobby with saving a few bucks at the pump 8)

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Dave45]

so your saying electrolysis produces HHO

 

[Smee]

so your saying electrolysis produces HHO

Same process, must give same results. Someone did a project on here showing how to create your own electrolysis setup to clean coins. Seems I remember there being a mention of the creation of hydrogen there.

We did it in grammar school back in the '60's for a class science project to separate hydrogen and oxygen.

The difference with the Stan Meyers example though, is using oscilation.

 

[Montana Jim]

STOP BLAMING THE OIL COMPANIES!!

WE are the ones buying the gas! There IS an alternative if you drive less than 40 miles a day and you will save money and lessen your environmental impact by going electric. BATTERY POWERED ELECTRIC is the best answer. NOT HYDROGEN!!!!!

http://e-volks.com/

I honestly hope they raise it so high that nobody can afford it. Then we wont have a choice but to get off of it.

Co2 and polution is choking the earth and nobody will stop until there is a cheaper alternative. THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE

Sure... the alternative is to buy a new vehicle? I'll drive it - you buy it for me.

My vehicles are paid for... GAS is the cheapest for me.

 

[Metal Head]

The problem with hydrogen is it takes more energy to make it than it produces.

As far as electricity is concerned you all act like Solar, wind and hydro power do not exist. There is green energy.

Think about this next time you wanna point the finger at the oil companies or the government-

Your next new car will most likely cost over 80,000 by the time you pay all your interest, and gas and maintenance and all that. Now add your electric and gas costs for the life of just your car, say 10 years at $150 a month average. That is $18,000!

Lets round it up and call it $100,000 for your energy and vehicle costs.

FOR THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU CAN COVER YOUR HOUSE WITH SOLAR PANELS, convert an existing vehicle to electric battery power, use your electicity to power your home and charge your car and probably have some extra to sell to the power company.

You can keep on old gas guzzler for those few times you take long drives more than 40 miles round trip.

OR...............

You can just point fingers and ask why somebody is not solving the problem.

So you can be broke and energy dependent forever. Or work on being energy independent and put the rest away for retirement.

THE PRICE OF ENERGY WILL NOT STOP RISING!!!

The sooner you start investing in your energy needs the more money you will save in the long run.

Do not finance your car!!!!!

Finance your power.

You will be rewarded in the long term.

If gas is $20 a gallon in 15 years (highly likely) $30,000 for energy independence will look like the smartest investment ever!


God Bless!

 

[blurr]

The problem with hydrogen is it takes more energy to make it than it produces.

As far as electricity is concerned you all act like Solar, wind and hydro power do not exist. There is green energy.

Think about this next time you wanna point the finger at the oil companies or the government-

Your next new car will most likely cost over 80,000 by the time you pay all your interest, and gas and maintenance and all that. Now add your electric and gas costs for the life of just your car, say 10 years at $150 a month average. That is $18,000!

Lets round it up and call it $100,000 for your energy and vehicle costs.

FOR THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU CAN COVER YOUR HOUSE WITH SOLAR PANELS, convert an existing vehicle to electric battery power, use your electicity to power your home and charge your car and probably have some extra to sell to the power company.

You can keep on old gas guzzler for those few times you take long drives more than 40 miles round trip.

OR...............

You can just point fingers and ask why somebody is not solving the problem.

So you can be broke and energy dependent forever. Or work on being energy independent and put the rest away for retirement.

THE PRICE OF ENERGY WILL NOT STOP RISING!!!

The sooner you start investing in your energy needs the more money you will save in the long run.

Do not finance your car!!!!!

Finance your power.

You will be rewarded in the long term.

If gas is $20 a gallon in 15 years (highly likely) $30,000 for energy independence will look like the smartest investment ever!


God Bless!

Gasoline will be an alternative feul if it hits $20 a gallon


John

 

[Metal Head]

Thats exactly right!!!!!!

So the gas companies will gladly sell you the hydrogen and you will be hooked on that!!!

Battery Power is the best solution for 80-90% of commuters.

I started driving 18 years ago and gas was 80 cents.

It WILL be at least $20 in 15 years!

Hell.... It will be $10 next year at this rate.


DO NOT BUY A NEW CAR. Invest in your own personal energy needs now.

No matter what happens if your energy needs are met you will be in good shape!

 

[Smee]

The problem with hydrogen is it takes more energy to make it than it produces.

As far as electricity is concerned you all act like Solar, wind and hydro power do not exist. There is green energy.

Think about this next time you wanna point the finger at the oil companies or the government-

Your next new car will most likely cost over 80,000 by the time you pay all your interest, and gas and maintenance and all that. Now add your electric and gas costs for the life of just your car, say 10 years at $150 a month average. That is $18,000!

Lets round it up and call it $100,000 for your energy and vehicle costs.

FOR THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY YOU CAN COVER YOUR HOUSE WITH SOLAR PANELS, convert an existing vehicle to electric battery power, use your electicity to power your home and charge your car and probably have some extra to sell to the power company.

You can keep on old gas guzzler for those few times you take long drives more than 40 miles round trip.

OR...............

You can just point fingers and ask why somebody is not solving the problem.

So you can be broke and energy dependent forever. Or work on being energy independent and put the rest away for retirement.

THE PRICE OF ENERGY WILL NOT STOP RISING!!!

The sooner you start investing in your energy needs the more money you will save in the long run.

Do not finance your car!!!!!

Finance your power.

You will be rewarded in the long term.

If gas is $20 a gallon in 15 years (highly likely) $30,000 for energy independence will look like the smartest investment ever!


God Bless!

FIrst, you talk as if everyone has more money than they need to begin with. Once you pass 4 or 5 grand for a vehicle, it's pretty much a waste. My $650 Ford Ranger will take me the same places your $ 80,000 car will, but I would keep the rest of the money for gas . . . will probably need it.

In the real world, some folks can afford things like you speak of, but most of them are considered wealthy by working people like me.

No, electrolysis does not consume more energy than it produces. My friend installed an Aquatune unit on his F250 pickup. It uses only the existing electrical system to operate, and about 1/2 gallon of water per tank of gasoline. His Triton V8, with automatic tranny and towing package (geared for power, not for highway driving) gets a mere 26 MPG. It was getting less than 20 MPG. Has more power, better acceleration, and actually runs smoother. You can feel it when he flips the switch.

Cover my house with solar panels? OK. What about the petrochemical processes used to produce them? What about the greenhouse gases, pollutants, and chemicals released in the manufacturing process? Production requires using large quantities of arsine, phosphine, and hydrogen (Wonder if they use electrolysis?) as well as cadmium, a heavy metal worse than mercury. What if it gets cloudy for a week? What if the wind doesn't blow today?

Battery backup? Look at the process used to create those batteries!!! Look at the damage done to the environment by their manufacture!

Electric vehicles . . . You know what, I am so sick of this idea that just because it comes from your home's electrical system that it is cleaner than gasoline! If the powerplant that supplies your electricity uses coal fired generators, you are essentially running a coal powered vehicle and the pollution you folk gripe about --- you would be contributing to it.

No, bubba, I'm broke now. But I'm not going to accept the fertilizer the environmentalists keep pitchin. I don't want any of that stuff on me. Bad enough to step in it.

 

[Metal Head]

[/quote]



No, electrolysis does not consume more energy than it produces. My friend installed an Aquatune unit on his F250 pickup. It uses only the existing electrical system to operate, and about 1/2 gallon of water per tank of gasoline. His Triton V8, with automatic tranny and towing package (geared for power, not for highway driving) gets a mere 26 MPG. It was getting less than 20 MPG. Has more power, better acceleration, and actually runs smoother. You can feel it when he flips the switch.
[/quote]

Your car engine makes more energy than it needs. That is why you can run a stereo, lights ..etc. Your hydrogen generator uses the power that is already available. And I agree it does work to improve gas mileage but lets not confuse that with zero point energy.

It is a scientific fact that you can not get more energy out of something than you put in, there is always loss. If you could, all of our energy problems would be solved.


I still maintain my point that when gas hits $20/gal It will be $400 to fill your tank. If you look at my post I am acounting for more than just vehicle cost. Even at a Price of $650 your Ranger is still gonna cost you at least $30,000 over the next 20 years.

YOU HAVE TO LOOK AHEAD!

Do yourself a favor. Put a mental note in your head that when gas hits $10 you will do something to secure your future energy needs if you dont buy into renewable energy now you will at $10. Only one problem....when we hit $10/gal you will be financing your fuel just to put food on the table, and you will never be energy independent because the hard reality is that the only thing not going up is your wages!

If we always spend our money on ways that it doesnt come back to us we will always be poor. If we always INVEST our money we will eventually be rich!

 

[Smee]

Your car engine makes more energy than it needs. That is why you can run a stereo, lights ..etc. Your hydrogen generator uses the power that is already available. And I agree it does work to improve gas mileage but lets not confuse that with zero point energy.

It is a scientific fact that you can not get more energy out of something than you put in, there is always loss. If you could, all of our energy problems would be solved.

The problem with hydrogen is it takes more energy to make it than it produces.

Energy can neither be created or destroyed. It can only be converted from one form to another. 5th grade science.

Let's see . . . you said my car engine makes more energy than it needs . . . but you say you can't get more energy out of something than what you put in . . . Hmmmmmmmmmmm In the country we call that DOUBLE TALK.

I did not say --- nor would I ever believe --- that one could make energy out of thin air.

What I do believe --- and what I did say --- is that you were wrong to assert that it takes more energy to perform the electrolysis than the process would / could release. If the vehicle becomes more efficient by the process, then it cannot be using more energy than it is using in the conversion process. It is taking in less fossil fuel per mile. It is using water that has had its chemical bond broken so that the Hydrogen and Oxygen enter the combustion chamber as gases. This results in less fossil fuels being used. Where is the negative?

As the process becomes more efficient, as more people are driven to experiment because of the greed of the oil companies, we may one day be able to start a car with a battery . . . that will produce its own hydrogen on demand and require only water to run. The hydrogen is not being created out of thin air, but the engine designed to run on hydrogen that it is powering would drive the generator that would power the continuing conversion process. Then again, it might be more desireable to use the hydrogen engine to power a generator to provide electrical power to the wheels of the vehicle. Who knows?

What most don't understand --- especially the die hard environmentalists --- is that EVERYTHING has a price. There is NO PANACEA like the "only benefits" tripe they serve up when they start talking about electric cars and such. The fact is that energy is lost (not destroyed, but converted to another form than the one desired), even in an AC/DC transformer, during the conversion from one form of energy to another. Likewise, it takes energy to remove oil from the ground. It takes energy to produce solar panels and everything else we might use to try to save energy. It isn't hopeless, it just takes more intelligence than many of us posses, and less greed than what the oil companies display.

In the case of Hydrogen, it isn't "creating energy from nothing" but rather a chemical conversion from water to two combustible gases. Now, the commercials for the hydrogen cars that Toyota and others produce claim the only byproduct is water. Why?

The internal combustion engine is relatively inefficient. The fact is that not all of the hydrogen would be converted to heat, nor all of the oxygen. In fact, a relatively small amount is actually converted by being burned. What is not converted, after exposure to heat . . . and being in the right proportions and environment . . . will recombine into water. If you collected all of that water after the combustion process, you would have a proportionately smaller amount of water than you began with based on how efficient the engine was.

If, as you claim, that would mean one could reuse the water for more electrolysis and, therefore, have a self renewing form of energy, then you do not understand that there is a loss of water as some of the hydrogen and oxygen are converted to heat in the combustion chamber. The burned atoms are not converting back to water because they were converted to heat energy. Only those which did not burn . . . and surely not even all of them . . . are converting back to water.

As for my friend's truck: If the vehicle produces more energy than it needs, then we should be harnessing that energy instead of letting it disappear into thin air, as your statement suggests. Please note again that energy can be neither created or destroyed . . . only converted. Therefore, your statement is completely ludicrous. The vehicle has the CAPACITY to convert more energy than it does, but it can never CREATE more energy than it uses. Using the Aquatune, or some other method for converting water, only takes advantage of available energy potential . . . and if it makes the vehicle more efficient in its use of gasoline, that is an advantage to everyone.

 

[rmptr]

I'll need to look at these aquatune systems, just don't know enough about them, but certainly have not seen a major buzz about them, which there would be, if they are significantly advantageous.

Word gets out quickly, via internet sources.

...Internal combustion engines are rather inefficient as evidenced by the large degree of lost heat in the process.
Much is lost to the coolant, and blowing out the pipe.

Some work has been done with ceramic engines, and turbo-chargers recover some of the energy lost.
A burn modifier such as hydrogen assist is possibly beneficial.

The system used in the prius is, of course, our prime example of work towards optimal recovery of energy.

Improvements in battery technology will be paramount.

Someone just posted an astute statement, that gasoline may soon become the alternative energy.

It is difficult to substitute for the tasks that may be accomplished readily through the use of liquid fuels, which is why we presently use them. As their use becomes more costly, we'll most likely find a way to subsist on much less than we now have available, which shall include the whole spectrum of consumable products.

Best,
rmptr

 

[Metal Head]

Sorry to call you out Smee but now I know you have no idea what you are talking about.

Hydrogen cars do not burn anything! They combine hydrogen and oxygen in a "fuel cell". That creates electricity as it is converted to water (byproduct). It is the exact opposite of electrolysis where you apply electricity to water to split the molecules and release hydrogen and oxygen.

No matter how you slice it it takes more energy to split the water than you get back from combining the two gases in the fuel cell.

I understand that your buddy burns hydrogen and oxygen (HHO or Brown's Gas) in his engine but that has nothing to do with where we are headed when we talk about hydrogen as CLEAN fuel! When you burn hydrogen you still get Co2 (greenhouse gas). The Idea is to burn nothing and have CLEAN energy.

Using electricity to make gas to burn OR combine in a fuel cell is a waste! It is better to STORE (battery) the energy.

Yes you can increase your mileage but that is ALL!

The ONLY reason hydrogen is even on the table is so you can drive an ELECTRIC FUEL CELL powered vehicle and "fill up" anywhere giving you unlimited range! Think about this...at gas stations they could offer universal rechargable batteries and accomplish the same thing. You would just "trade" your battery like you do with a propane tank for your grill and pay a fee for them charging it.

OH .... ONE MAJOR PROBLEM. The gas companies don't make any money that way!

But NONE of this is any good unless the electricity was clean to begin with (Solar, Wind, Hydro/electric).

I hope you understand a little better now. This is something I have been looking into for years. I didnt just get on the boat because gas went up!

Oh yeah..I know energy cant be created or destroyed. I think you were getting a little too technical there and missing the point.

So........ your engine CONVERTS more energy from gasoline than it needs. Feel better now?

 

[rmptr]

Metal head, would you direct me (us) to your favorite website source of info on fuel cell technology?

I was under the impression electricity was employed to separate the hydrogen and oxygen available within water so it could be burned within the engine, leaving only a periodic drip out the exhaust pipe.

Sorry, not much formal education in physics, or even chemistry, but I'd like to learn at least enough to understand the process.

Thanks,
rmptr

 

[Metal Head]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-cell.htm

http://www.dangerouslaboratories.org/h2homesystem.pdf

http://www.hydrogensolar.com/index.html



THIS is the start of the solar revolution, Solar cells can now be printed like a newspaper!!!!
http://www.nanosolar.com/


CONVERT YOUR OLD P.O.S. car to electric!!!!!!!
http://e-volks.com/

 

[Metal Head]

Ever heard of a Stirling engine?

It requires only a difference in temperature to run!!!!

Its been around since the 1800's

This one runs off of the temperature difference between your hand and the surrounding air!



This one uses solar power to produce 25,000 watts... That could power your whole block!!! (not too big either) Call the neighbors and get them to chip in. $250,000




The most simple engine in the world! (that I know of) Aslo a type of Stirling engine.

[youtube=425,350]cjjkj-UGboM&hl=en[/youtube]

 

[rmptr]

Thanks MH,

I'll start reviewing the sites today...

(It'll most likely be 110% again... I ain't going out to roast unless I need to!)

Yah, a friend has built a couple stirling engines, does diy parabolic reflectors for hot water, and likes steam quite a bit. Solar panels for electric have been to pricey for him. Perhaps they'll come down in price.

I'd sure like to play with all the minimal impact transport options.
Basically, here in CA you'd be arrested if you went down the street upon a machine that could not be licensed.

They have outlawed the 'pocket bikes' which might get 200mpg.
For a while, kids were using them going to work, and about town. No more.

My own travels have been cut back to a minimum, due to gas prices.
When I go out, it's for work, and a significant amount of tools and materials are required.
The alternative energy vehicles just won't cut it.

I'm sure considering my options, though!

Best,
rmptr

 

[Smee]

Sorry to call you out Smee but now I know you have no idea what you are talking about.

Please do. Now, the fact that the internal combustion engine is extremely inefficient, is likely a major contributor to the "shortage" we see today --- if it is real (although I do believe it is a manufactured shortage to drive up prices). Personally, I don't see much difference between what you are trying to sell and what we already have. Please read ALL of the post before you comment.

No matter how you slice it it takes more energy to split the water than you get back from combining the two gases in the fuel cell.

If that is true, your "fuel cell" idea is a waste of time and money. And, the more I read, the more it sounds like "snake oil" --- based on the information available from your sources. Why would I say that?

If, as you assert, "it takes more energy to split the water than you get back from combining the two gases in the fuel cell", then these things are a horrible waste of energy. That would make it appear that you are proposing that we adopt another inefficient form of energy.

Hydrogen cars do not burn anything! They combine hydrogen and oxygen in a "fuel cell". That creates electricity as it is converted to water (byproduct). It is the exact opposite of electrolysis where you apply electricity to water to split the molecules and release hydrogen and oxygen.

Very true. They take hydrogen atoms and oxygen atoms, which were produced by another process, and make water. To convert it back to water they use precious metals such as Platinum and Gold. Not cheap energy.

a fuel cell is an electrochemical energy conversion device. A fuel cell converts the chemicals hydrogen and oxygen into water, and in the process it produces electricity . . . With a fuel cell, chemicals constantly flow into the cell so it never goes dead -- as long as there is a flow of chemicals into the cell, the electricity flows out of the cell. Most fuel cells in use today use hydrogen and oxygen as the chemicals.

(Bold and italics added by Smee)

Where does the "split hydrogen and oxygen" the fuel cell uses come from? The hydrogen and oxygen fairies?

No. It requires energy to split the molecules up. Whether you do it from the atmosphere or by electrolysis. An energy cell creates electricity by combining these atoms BACK into water. Therefore, what you in effect have is . . . a transformer. You might as well convert AC current to DC current. It is the same theory, just a different process. Also, even though an electrical transformer is one of the most efficient ways to convert energy, it is not 100% efficient. I seriously doubt that the process described is as efficient as an electric transformer.

The only way for there to be an advantage is if the fuel cell created more energy than it used. You have already stated that such is not possible, and you spoke truely.

What it appears to be, and I could just be stupid, is an attempt by the proponents of this technology to become the NEW OIL COMPANIES of tomorrow. Once we become dependant on them, we will be right back where we are today . . . at the mercy of contrived shortages and greedy people.

What they want us to believe is that science isn't intelligent enough to find another way to do things. Therefore, we must be locked into this path. Thus we will be reliant on the teat of the ENERGY MONGERS as well as their benevolence, much as we are now towards the oil companies.

I see a shell game going on here. The goal is to seperate us from our money, just like the old snake oil salesmen. That stuff made you feel good too, but it did NOTHING for you once the alcohol wore off.

 

[Metal Head]

O.K. Now you are on my page..... But the whole entire point I wanted to make since my first post on this thread is that the ONLY way out of this mess is BATTERY POWERED ELECTRIC VEHICLES! I am not a supporter of fuel cell technology.

If we use our own solar power to charge our own cars it results in both the lowest cost over time and the most environmentally friendly option. It is not perfect but it is as close as we can get.

Ideally a family should have 1 battery powered electric for all driving within its range and a fuel cell vehicle for longer distances. And of course they should supply their own energy with solar.

If you do not prepare for this you will be stuck with a fuel cell vehicle in 20 years and still paying through the nose to refill the hydrogen at the filling station. It is either that or you will be paying a HIGHER price per mile and running gas, not to mention a pollution fee to the government I'm sure.

I am just trying to get people to not buy a NEW car.....Invest in your energy needs instead.

 

[Urban Prospector]

For every action there is an EQUAL and opposite reaction.
Sterling engine is the answer now we just need to figure out how to make an auto and passengers half the weight of a playing card. To the prevailing brain trust here I propose telepathic transportation is just as close as all options discussed. A major drawback is the LSD makes it hard to concentrate on work once I get there.
Do ya'll realize your talking about perpetual motion machines thinking you can get more out then you put in.Welfare system is the only of that type.

 

[blurr]

For every action there is an EQUAL and opposite reaction.
Sterling engine is the answer now we just need to figure out how to make an auto and passengers half the weight of a playing card. To the prevailing brain trust here I propose telepathic transportation is just as close as all options discussed. A major drawback is the LSD makes it hard to concentrate on work once I get there.
Do ya'll realize your talking about perpetual motion machines thinking you can get more out then you put in.Welfare system is the only of that type.

I didn't want to say anything, but you started it I saw an ad for a 300 mpg carburator, add that to the fuel line magnets that "line up" fuel molecules, and we should have this energy thing licked

John