Anyone want to Run saltwater as FUEL???

[ddmracing05]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Tf4gOS8aoFk


"I want it NOW"

[ddmracing05]

wow.. no comments? I thought id get some on this one.

[zad0030]

Couple problems,
It only burns inside of his radio wave generator. So to use that in your engine you need one of those things which requires electricity and probably lots of it.

I dont think we want to use water as a FUEL seeing as water is esential to life and Al Gore will go nuts with Global Warming once we start draining the oceans.

[Jason B]

I read a scientific article about this and as I recall they explained it ran at a power deficit. It was also unlikely to be functional in a truly portable situation.

...from what I remember of the article

[anhaney]

Cool

Subscribe

[ddmracing05]

yea true... idk I would just think it is cool... Now if we could run something on fresh water.. No Biggie. It would just evaporate and get it back.

[chpthril]

Not sure there would be enough BTU's/per oz. The trick would be to develop an injection sys that would produce a fine enough spray to properly atomize the saltwater but not clog up with salt or corrode.

Just think gasoline was originally dump from the refinement towers because it was the heavier lamp oil they wanted and gasoline was just an unwanted, useless byproduct until they invented the internal combustion engine. Give it about 10 yrs and someone will be burning it in a lawnmower engine or something.

[raythompson]

Typical TV station reporting when the reporter really does not understand science (or how to spell their name). Sterling engines will run on the heat from your hand and don't take much energy when free spinning. The electricity required to break down the salt water (the RF generator) uses more electricity than it can generate. This is a net loss.

What we should be doing in this country is building nuclear reactors. For the cost of the war in Iraq we could have built 200 standard design reactors. We could be producing enough electricity to make electric cars practical for commuting. This would leave gas for the long haul and our toys. We could have told the oil countries to pound sand for all we care. Oil would be $1.00 a barrell for the good stuff.

Our administration with dreams of hydrogen (ever find a hydrogen well?) is short sighted, feel good talk. Electricity is the answer and nuclear is the way to generate that energy. Nuclear is safe. Ask how many have died digging coal or drilling for oil on an offshore rig. Lots. How many have died from nuclear power (forget Chernobyl as that was an unsafe design run by unsafe individuals), none. Three Mile Island did exactly what it was supposed to do, contain the problem.

Newer designs are even safe. In the event of coolant loss they simply shut down. They cannot go critical, they cannot meltdown. The design is inherently safe.

But for now keep the stupid Al Gores and stupid reporters out of the science business. They know little of what they speak.

[scoot18]

I saw this video clip a few months ago and thought the same thing, hey this would be great. Then I found out that the energy it took to create the salt water engery far exceeded what was being produced I then lost all hope. But you know many things were discovered by accident and took decades to make into something practical. Don't give up on it yet, something good may come of it, or maybe not.....................Still pretty cool.

[LovinPowell]

After just spending over 80 bucks to fill up my suburban, I'm ready to try anything.

[anhaney]

Typical TV station reporting when the reporter really does not understand science (or how to spell their name). Sterling engines will run on the heat from your hand and don't take much energy when free spinning. The electricity required to break down the salt water (the RF generator) uses more electricity than it can generate. This is a net loss.

What we should be doing in this country is building nuclear reactors. For the cost of the war in Iraq we could have built 200 standard design reactors. We could be producing enough electricity to make electric cars practical for commuting. This would leave gas for the long haul and our toys. We could have told the oil countries to pound sand for all we care. Oil would be $1.00 a barrell for the good stuff.

Our administration with dreams of hydrogen (ever find a hydrogen well?) is short sighted, feel good talk. Electricity is the answer and nuclear is the way to generate that energy. Nuclear is safe. Ask how many have died digging coal or drilling for oil on an offshore rig. Lots. How many have died from nuclear power (forget Chernobyl as that was an unsafe design run by unsafe individuals), none. Three Mile Island did exactly what it was supposed to do, contain the problem.

Newer designs are even safe. In the event of coolant loss they simply shut down. They cannot go critical, they cannot meltdown. The design is inherently safe.

But for now keep the stupid Al Gores and stupid reporters out of the science business. They know little of what they speak.

Well said

[ddmracing05]

unless theycan come up with some kind of low fuel and yet high generating generator to power a smaller version of that machine. 20$ Generator gas> 85$ Truck gas

[dogbert]

What we should be doing in this country is building nuclear reactors. For the cost of the war in Iraq we could have built 200 standard design reactors. We could be producing enough electricity to make electric cars practical for commuting. This would leave gas for the long haul and our toys. We could have told the oil countries to pound sand for all we care. Oil would be $1.00 a barrell for the good stuff.

Our administration with dreams of hydrogen (ever find a hydrogen well?) is short sighted, feel good talk. Electricity is the answer and nuclear is the way to generate that energy. Nuclear is safe. Ask how many have died digging coal or drilling for oil on an offshore rig. Lots. How many have died from nuclear power (forget Chernobyl as that was an unsafe design run by unsafe individuals), none. Three Mile Island did exactly what it was supposed to do, contain the problem.

Newer designs are even safe. In the event of coolant loss they simply shut down. They cannot go critical, they cannot meltdown. The design is inherently safe.

Europe has tons of nuclear reactors and they all work pretty well.

[raythompson]

Europe has tons of nuclear reactors and they all work pretty well.

Yes, I know. Safe reactors. But here we have to deal with the tree hugging environmental whackos. I live close to Oak Ridge, TN where nuclear is king. Yearly we have to deal with the protests and other nonsense.

The environmental whackos think they know the answers but are in fact very poorly versed. These are the people that wave signs "Save Our Forests", and the signs are painted on paper held up by sticks of wood. Then get in their SUV's and drive home to their house with the wood burning fireplace. It is OK to protest as long as it does not affect them.

Electric is the answer. With enough electrical generating power we could heat our homes with electricity and avoid burning oil and natural gas. We would have commuting cars with a 150 mile range (with A/C) that would recharge in less than 5 hours. If such a car existed for a reasonable price I would buy it in a heart beat.

Instead we are burning petroleum products. These same products not only are used for gas, but they are used to create plastics and many other useful products. But we continue to burn the product.

Now we get on an ethanol kick and the price of corn jumps by 100%. So we will burn one of our major food sources rather than use it for food.

Hydrogen is touted as the fuel of future. Where are the hydrogen wells? Hydrogen is generated by distillation of seawater or conversion of other hydrocarbons (burning that crude oil again). Hydrogen is difficult to contain as hydrogen wants to get out. Sealing hydrogen systems is a very real problem because of the cold, the pressure, and the small size of the molecule. Providing a tank of liquid hydrogen for any reasonable range produces a heavy tank, complicated systems, and unfortunately, not a very long range.

To distill large quantities of hydrogen will require, you guessed it, large quantities of electricity. All possible power generating water sources have been dammed or are protected by the environmental whackos (got to protect that slime snail). Solar is unreliable and cannot respond to demand. Wind suffers the same problems. There are no reliable, and cheap, methods to store large quantities of electricity. A 400KV NIMH batter simple does not exist and will never exist.

Nuclear can respond to demand loads. Nuclear is safe. Nuclear is plentiful.

Disposing of nuclear waste can be easily handled by glassifying the material and placing the material in a subduction zone in the deap ocean tectonic plates that comprise the surface of the earth. The material will slowly be absorbed back into the mantle of the earth and will present no problems.

Solutions to nuclear concerns have workable solutions. Almost unlimited power. Clean power. Safe power. Enough power to make this country totally energy independant. We would have enough oil to satisfy our manufacturing needs. We could tell the sand monkeys to pound sand. The price of oil would plummet and bankrupt these countries. These countries have nothing else that is of value and removing the value of oil will destroy these countries.

But our politically correct, and heavily invested in oil administration does not want the price of oil to fall. When the IRAQ conflict started oil was $27.00 a barrel. The price has gone up 400% because of the fool that we call a president whose puppet strings are being yanked by that criminally corrupt vice president.

By the way, I winterized my boat.