Scientists discover how to burn salt water!

[Abdurahman]

This is awesome. We might see water powered cars in the near future.

http://green.yahoo.com/index.php?q=node/1570

ERIE, Pa. - An Erie cancer researcher has found a way to burn salt water, a novel invention that is being touted by one chemist as the "most remarkable" water science discovery in a century. John Kanzius happened upon the discovery accidentally when he tried to desalinate seawater with a radio-frequency generator he developed to treat cancer. He discovered that as long as the salt water was exposed to the radio frequencies, it would burn. The discovery has scientists excited by the prospect of using salt water, the most abundant resource on earth, as a fuel. Rustum Roy, a Penn State University chemist, has held demonstrations at his State College lab to confirm his own observations. The radio frequencies act to weaken the bonds between the elements that make up salt water, releasing the hydrogen, Roy said. Once ignited, the hydrogen will burn as long as it is exposed to the frequencies, he said.
The discovery is "the most remarkable in water science in 100 years," Roy said. "This is the most abundant element in the world. It is everywhere," Roy said. "Seeing it burn gives me the chills." Roy will meet this week with officials from the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense to try to obtain research funding. The scientists want to find out whether the energy output from the burning hydrogen — which reached a heat of more than 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit — would be enough to power a car or other heavy machinery. "We will get our ideas together and check this out and see where it leads," Roy said. "The potential is huge."

[Mr Buckshot]

Looks interesting. We're unfortunately still a long shot from abandoning gas-powered cars (even hybrid cars aren't that friendly), but the more alternatives come out the better. After all, global warming is a bitch.

[Con]

I wish there was a video, or a better explanation than "the radio frequencies act to weaken the bonds between the elements that make up salt water, releasing the hydrogen". So it's like electrolysis but with radio waves acting on the salt? What causes the fire?

[Texrat]

It looks like the ignition is secondary. Excite the molecules, release the hydrogen, ignite.

And: holy shit!

[Emmzee]

holy shit!
My thoughts exactly.

[Warsaw]

This is fake. he even said so. Yes, I am too lazy to dig up the article that said he said so.

[Emmzee]

This is fake. he even said so. Yes, I am too lazy to dig up the article that said he said so.
Oh hi, Mr. Buzzkill. I'm sorry, but you weren't invited to this thread.

[CN3089]

I wish there was a video,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kKtKSEQBeI


also, crosspostin from gbx


Kanzius has admitted that his machine requires more energy than it releases,
Just like any other way to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. This one just includes the impressive sight of water burning. vhttp://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-geno.gifv

[Warsaw]

Oh hi, Mr. Buzzkill. I'm sorry, but you weren't invited to this thread.

Public forum :p.

Also, it takes more energy to split water because both the Hydrogen and Oxygen have full valence shells when bonded, and it takes a relatively large amount of energy to remove an electron from a full set.

[Abdurahman]

Awesome.

[DOMINATOR]

heres the video clip http://www.clipupload.com/clip/showp...o/6457/si/salt (http://www.clipupload.com/clip/showphoto.php/photo/6457/si/salt)
i like the "the engine running on nothing but salt water" uhh hello you are running the generator to split the hydrogen and oxygen

[CN3089]

Also, it takes more energy to split water because both the Hydrogen and Oxygen have full valence shells when bonded, and it takes a relatively large amount of energy to remove an electron from a full set.

You're missing the point. Yes, it takes a lot of energy to break the bonds in water, but in this case, you're reforming the same bonds and getting all the energy that went into breaking the bonds back. The reason for the net energy loss is the loss of energy to the surroundings.


Furthermore, WATER POWERED CAR OIL COMPANIES BU$H http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-tinfoil.gif

[Mr Buckshot]

Fuck, I just started IB Chemistry Higher Level Year 1, and I don't 100% understand what you guys are saying...

[Emmzee]

Furthermore, WATER POWERED CAR OIL COMPANIES BU$H JAHRAIN http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-tinfoil.gif
Fixed.

[Texrat]

Cold fusion redux! :lol:

[Agamemnon]

Sounds promising.

[TeeKup]

Cold fusion redux! :lol:

Wait, wouldn't it be fission since they're splitting hydrogen and oxygen?

[Texrat]

Wait, wouldn't it be fission since they're splitting hydrogen and oxygen?

I was referring to the drama.

Seriously, though, while you can't get something for nothing, even gasoline engines suffer the limits of thermodynamics. We're so used to them being the status quo we accept the inefficiencies... but picture how much energy must be expended in getting that gasoline fuel to your vehicle, much less the losses from combustion. It's easy to see there's a net loss there, too, ie putting more energy into the conversion effort than you derive. We just don't see the loss. Assuming for sake of argument this saltwater thing does turn out to be real, the inefficiencies cited in this thread are just more apparent than those involved with gas-fueled internal combustion engines because more of the process is close to our final use. We don't see the oil exploration, drilling, shipping, refining, and final delivery costs (aka losses). Out of sight, out of mind.

[TeeKup]

I was referring to the drama.

Oh right.

[Mass]

Even with a net energy loss, the ability to carrie around energy in a portable form is useful.
Also the real potential in my mind is the ability to simply convert cars to run on the new fuel. If you could modify your automobile to have the cylinders sandwhiched by the radio emmiter you won't need to create an entirely new vehicle. And when you think about how much energy has gone into making automobiles en masse for a century or so, you realize this does have real potential.

Sure you would need to charge a battery to run the frequency, but it would require less energy than constructing brand new electric cars.

[Ingulit]

Fuck, I just started IB Chemistry Higher Level Year 1, and I don't 100% understand what you guys are saying...
Are you kidding? I got a 3 on the AP Chemistry exam (I was feeling terrible that day) and I understood every word. :S

EDIT: If you could somehow create a spark that would power the radio frequency emitter for just enough to ignite the salt water, you might have something. Unless you can expend a relatively small amount of overhead energy to get it started, this won't be exactly "portable." If someone could work out the math, though...

[rossmum]

Even with a net energy loss, the ability to carrie around energy in a portable form is useful.
http://www.fatbraintoys.com/images/products/large/WB002.jpg

[Texrat]

My God, I think ross is onto something!!! :XD:

[Kornman00]

yeah :downs:

[n00b1n8R]

so we burn salt and are left with what?
pure water?
:o

that is really cool.

[CN3089]

so we burn salt and are left with what?
pure water?
:o

that is really cool.

It's not the salt that's burning http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-eng101.gif


Even with a net energy loss, the ability to carrie around energy in a portable form is useful.
Also the real potential in my mind is the ability to simply convert cars to run on the new fuel. If you could modify your automobile to have the cylinders sandwhiched by the radio emmiter you won't need to create an entirely new vehicle. And when you think about how much energy has gone into making automobiles en masse for a century or so, you realize this does have real potential.

Sure you would need to charge a battery to run the frequency, but it would require less energy than constructing brand new electric cars.

Batteries? Then why not just run the car straight off the electricity? It'd be far more efficient.

[n00b1n8R]

oic
burn hydrogen and are left with salt?

[DaneO'Roo]

Even if it worked well, it'd never take off. Not in our lifetime anyway. Relatively cheap ass fuel for everyone, with a massive oil industry churning out millions of dollars to the government suffering?

Olol

[n00b1n8R]

who said it'd be cheap :rolleyes:

[Reaper Man]

Hydrogen fuel cell cars ftw tbh.

[Bad Waffle]

err, when i read this "burning salt" i thought, "err, wouldn't that end up in some Cl2 gas? which is POISONOUS?" and then i thought

"err, wouldnt we get pure sodium? which is also POISONOUS?"

im still kinda iffy on this stuff. i want some more proof that the salt is just a catalyst and doesnt partake in the reaction.

[Flyboy]

Public forum :p.

Also, it takes more energy to split water because both the Hydrogen and Oxygen have full valence shells when bonded, and it takes a relatively large amount of energy to remove an electron from a full set.
Exactly. Even though this is an efficient way, your going to put more carbon dioxide into the air than your likely going to take out. It's called a net increase.

[Neuro Guro]

-

[Warsaw]

I can't believe you guys are still taking this salt-water power source seriously...

Also, there are already all-electric cars that run on Lithium Ion batteris. They can get up to 220 miles on one charge, travel at speeds up to 120mph, 0 to 60mph in 4.3 seconds, and each minute of charge time = 1 point of charge.

Problem right now is the cost (you can buy them), but that is because these are prototype templates for mass production. It was on Yahoo! not too long ago.

[Texrat]

But saltwater as fuel is more fun. Take your reality with you on your way out. :p

[CN3089]

Exactly. Even though this is an efficient way, your going to put more carbon dioxide into the air than your likely going to take out. It's called a net increase.

uhhh


There's no carbon dioxide going into or out of the air. What are you talking about? http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-psyduck.gif

[Neuro Guro]

-

[Abdurahman]

I had a crazy idea when I was thinking about this at school today. Giant Zeppelins with giant radiowave trainsmitters, and I'll fill all the skies with them after I become the supreme Czar. Guess wut. I'm setting the ocean on fire, and it'll be really hardcore.

Also,

http://www.games.ru/review/ra2/shot2.jpg

[Flyboy]

I can't believe you guys are still taking this salt-water power source seriously...

Also, there are already all-electric cars that run on Lithium Ion batteris. They can get up to 220 miles on one charge, travel at speeds up to 120mph, 0 to 60mph in 4.3 seconds, and each minute of charge time = 1 point of charge.

Problem right now is the cost (you can buy them), but that is because these are prototype templates for mass production. It was on Yahoo! not too long ago.
Because of the mining required to get those things, it's still not that friendly on the green. (green in the environment, green in your wallet is a different story).

[n00b1n8R]

um..

how much energy does it take to create these radio waves?
still cool but now I spent 5 minutes thinking about it it also sounds rather silly.

[rossmum]

uhhh


There's no carbon dioxide going into or out of the air. What are you talking about? http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/CN3089/Emoticons/emot-psyduck.gif
Unless he was referring to any possible CO2 that comes from the generator/battery production process, agreed.

[Texrat]

Unless he was referring to any possible CO2 that comes from the generator/battery production process, agreed.

I could see O3, but CO2?

[rossmum]

If you want to go way back to the power generation process, yes - depending on what type of powerplant it is.

[Texrat]

point.