?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Why exactly isnt this bigger news?

http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=68227

Cure to Energy Crisis? Complete removal from the Oil IV line. . .

There is a video as well.

Rev

Comments

( 12 comments — Leave a comment )
billyname99
May. 28th, 2007 09:57 pm (UTC)
Why exactly isnt this bigger news?

Because the Inventor wants to live a long and healthy life.

Do you honestly think the Oil Companies will ever let anything like that become common knowledge?

If it works, and he can build it, and even if the plans and specs get published, the Oil Companies and Car Companies will figure out a way to kill it or at least repress it until they can figure out how to charge you an arm & a leg for it.

There have been other breakthoughs and inventions in the past, and they were all either quietly bought out or the inventor "had an accident" and all of his Notes, Plans and Prototypes were destroyed.

Tesla figured how to broadcast electricity like radio waves. Power was to be freely accessible to everyone, but JP Morgan pulled the plug on his research funding because he realized he'd never be able to make someone pay for electricity when they could get it simply by extending an antenna. so the money was cut off and O'l JP made sure no one else gave Tesla any money to finish the project.
razorslave
May. 28th, 2007 11:37 pm (UTC)
Re: Why exactly isnt this bigger news?
did you watch the video? It's an extremely basic process. Radio waves + salt water. Cat's outta the bag. . .

Rev
billyname99
May. 29th, 2007 12:27 am (UTC)
Re: Why exactly isnt this bigger news?

Yes I saw the video. He also stated that he is interested in selling it.
Which means that some oilco (or a shell corp owned by an oilco) will buy it and patent it.

They will also be sure to sue the living hell out of anyone who tries to duplicate the process as an alternative fuel.

They might not be able to keep someone from duplicating it and building an engine around it, but they WILL sue for Patent Infringement, and they will probably win. Which will drive any would-be garage tinkerers into bankruptcy.

There is NO WAY the Oil Industry is going to let this country have a Cheap, Clean, Efficient Fuel source without a fight.
billyname99
May. 29th, 2007 12:39 am (UTC)
Another thing, There are lots of Clean and Cheap Fuels out there, Alchohol being the first that comes to mind.

99% of the gasoline burning vehicles can be converted to run on Pure Alchohol for about a hundred bucks. The exhaust is MUCH Cleaner that Gas and it is Carbon Neutral. You can make it from your organic garbage. Throw your potato peels, old bread, orange rinds and apple cores into a tank with some water, sugar and a handful of yeast and in 3 weeks, you've got fuel!
Yet for some reason, we still burn thru oil like Whiney Houston goes thru an 8-ball.

We do this because you can't pull up to the pump and fill your tank with 190 proof.

V.O. Diesel is not an option yet either, because You can't roll into the Full Service lane and ask for the High Test Wesson.

This is because the oilcos don't want it to be like that.

They will pump out every last drop of oil and sell it off to be burned before they move onto anything else, And they have lots of suppressed technology, waitng for the day the last gallon of 89 octane regular get burned into hydrocarbons.
davidlucas
May. 29th, 2007 01:04 am (UTC)
Oil giants are putting large amounts of money into "research" for alternative fuels, but they still have a lot of incentive to stick with oil for the time being. The infrastructure is already in place. Biofuels require lots of input for not a lot of output (when compared to oil, anyway). And then there is the issue of giants buying ideas and either destroying them, or patenting them and not using them.

Governments have the power to change this, but politicians own stocks in oil giants and likely are worried about the return on their own investments. You place a bunch of regulations on an oil company and it's profits might slow down for a while. Yes, they will eventually slow down out of necessity anyway, but probably not before said politician retires. The Dems seem interested in doing more to promote "energy independence", but I doubt they'll do much more than throw a couple billion dollars at universities to re-establish truths that are already known.

Now to watch the video to see if I can poke holes in it.
davidlucas
May. 29th, 2007 01:21 am (UTC)
Ah. And where does the energy to power the RF generator come from?

I obviously don't know much about cars, but it seems that with some sort of battery involved that would help start the vehicle, this would work just fine. I'd like to know how much burning you get out of a gallon of salt water, and are we sure that the by-product of burning salt isn't a bad thing?

razorslave
May. 29th, 2007 06:16 am (UTC)
not much if he developed it in his kitchen. . . the lab they were showing was VERIFYING his results. . . I'm definately interested in seeing the hard science behind this.
yakvomit
May. 29th, 2007 06:18 pm (UTC)
the salt acts to make the water conductive, the radio waves increase the energy state of the water and split it into hydrogen and oxygen, the flame recombines the hydrogen and oxygen the outcome is...more water.

its basically the same thing as electrolysis...only instead of sending the power in the form of electricity to an anode and cathode submersed in the water, the radio waves are transmitting it to the water via the salt. I'd imagine some amount of chlorine gas may be given off by this process. He should try the same thing using something like NaHCO3 (baking soda) probably work the same and without the nasty effect of giving off chlorine gas.


unless he found some magicaltastic (yes that's a technical word :D )frequency that can increase the efficiency of the electrolysis process there will be a significant net loss and is likely way less efficient than just regular old electrolysis...ie sticking some carbon/stainless steel in water with a DC current through it.

there is a way to liberate large amounts of hydrogen gas from regular water via oxidization of aluminum and other highly reactive metals however and these are the most likely "future" technologies that will use the water as a hydrogen based energy storage source. If you don't mind the toxic effects of mercury you can even test this at home... aluminum, water, and a drop of mercury on the aluminum...the mercury reacts with the aluminum oxide layer that normally prevents it from corroding further the rest of the aluminum bonds with the oxygen in the water rapidly forming aluminum oxide some kind of nasty mercury aluminum amalgamate and hydrogen gas in the form of convenient little bubbles. There's a much less nasty method that uses gallium/aluminum pellets...but not many people have gallium laying around the house...nor should they really have mercury either for that matter.

Even still this is nothing more than a form of dense energy storage as it takes considerable amounts of energy in the form of electricity to convert the raw form of aluminum, bauxite into pure aluminum so what you are extracting is a percentage less of the initial energy it took to convert it to pure aluminum in the first place.

I wish they would of had some kind of stats in that video about what frequency, wattage etc that guy was using...but then if he was looking to sell it...bah looked pretty damn big I'm guessing it was pumping out more power than your average microwave...which is a lot less than you get out of a little flame from a test tube.

-k
daq42
May. 30th, 2007 06:49 am (UTC)
A handcrank and 4 rare earth magnets will get you enough power to generate the RF. The question is what amount of power do you have to put into the whole process to make is self-sustaining. Can you hand crank it up and then let the first couple of strokes ignite the initial explosions in the cylinders, which will then deliver power back to the crank shaft so you can generate your electricity?

Could you make an electrical generator out of this process, and then deliver your locomotion through electric motors instead of applying direct power in the same manner as current gas powered vehicles?

These questions would be fun to ask.
billyname99
May. 29th, 2007 06:28 am (UTC)

Unfortunately, Science tends to be forced onto the back burner by Politicks and Money.

Until there is a Major Political shift as well as a serious Profit Motive behind Bio-Fuels, we are Stuck with Oil.
razorslave
May. 29th, 2007 07:05 am (UTC)
Bio fuels as they currently exist arent even a viable option. NONE of them net more energy than they take to produce. Particularly NOT corn. Hemp would do it, but once again, Until there is a Major Political shift as well as a serious Profit Motive behind Bio-Fuels, we are Stuck with Oil.

Rev
yakvomit
May. 29th, 2007 06:21 pm (UTC)
after the apocalypse...I plan on harnessing the power of whatever fat rich CEO's are still running around begging for food...I'll put them to work in the salt mines so to speak.

-k
( 12 comments — Leave a comment )