Water Fuel Cell Research Site
knews4...@yahoo.com
Watch the videos.
Meyer explains why "Electricl Polarization" works different from
"Electrolysis."
Much more there for the serious researcher and experimenter.
Eeyore
knews4...@yahoo.com
wrote:
> knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/index.php?sid=db12475327496042ca0e9a3...
>
> > Watch the videos.
> > Meyer explains why "Electricl Polarization" works different from
> > "Electrolysis."
>
> > Much more there for the serious researcher and experimenter.
http://www.h2earth.org/main.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md8-wvV2jHM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9XrLOudwRw&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiA4z_Kpgg4&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJPE6d2R9uo&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fFp3CJZMTw&mode=related&search=
knews4...@yahoo.com
And an interesting experiment.
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf
knews4...@yahoo.com
http://www.oupower.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1602&sid=3d25b543fda71e2f5b40c4bf11448942
Dan Bloomquist
knews4...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Ravi's Duplication of a Meyer Cell.
> http://www.oupower.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1602&sid=3d25b543fda71e2f5b40c4bf11448942
>
Of coarse, this is bullshit, but your previous post:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf
Needs peer review.
Do you know what that is? A claim of 100 years of observations,
contradicted...
Do you understand that all hell would break loose? Do you understand
that? I've been posting the implications for years. Do you get it?
Don't claim otherwise just because you 'believe'.......
Dan Bloomquist
knews4...@yahoo.com wrote:
Repetition does not make a truth. Why act like all the rest of the idiots?
Eeyore
Eeyore
knews4...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Ravi's Duplication of a Meyer Cell.
> http://www.oupower.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1602&sid=3d25b543fda71e2f5b40c4bf11448942
Bwahahahahaahahahahaa !
Eeyore
knews4...@yahoo.com wrote:
> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf
" Non-Faradic generation of hydrogen gas is sometimes 80 times higher than the gas from normal electrolysis. Excess hydrogen has proved difficult to replicate by other laboratories, although we are able to reproduce it regularly. "
I wonder why that is.
Graham
Don Lancaster
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse153.pdf for a detailed analysis.
--
Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: d...@tinaja.com
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
knews4...@yahoo.com
> Eeyore wrote:
>
> > knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf
>
> > " Non-Faradic generation of hydrogen gas is sometimes 80 times higher than the gas from normal electrolysis. Excess hydrogen has proved difficult to replicate by other laboratories, although we are able to reproduce it regularly. "
>
> > I wonder why that is.
>
> > Graham
>
> Mostly because the gas is really steam.
>
>
> --
> Many thanks,
>
> Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
> Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
> rss:http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: d...@tinaja.com
>
Sure it is Donny.
This from a guy who has never been within a hundred miles of a working
cell....
But don't worry. The succussful experimenters and researchers don't
need your permission to build a proper cell.
Fred Kasner
Polarization of water is a natural process. What is a dipole with a
negative end lying near the center of the oxygen atom and two positive
ends lying near the two hydrogen atoms. It results from the differences
in electronegativities of the two kinds of atoms that constitute the
molecule of water.
What an idiot you are, JW.
FK
Fred Kasner
And why, pray tell, is this wonderful device commonly available for
purchase as a cheap way to produce hydrogen gas to power an engine?
Don't bother to try to bamboozle us with claims of power and fuel
company conspiracies. They would love to be able to reduce their costs
and sell to the public a dirt cheap fuel.
FK
Eeyore
Don Lancaster wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> > knews4...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> >>http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf
> >
> >
> > " Non-Faradic generation of hydrogen gas is sometimes 80 times higher than the gas from normal electrolysis. Excess > hydrogen has proved difficult to replicate by other laboratories, although we are able to reproduce it regularly. "
>
> >
> > I wonder why that is.
>
>
> Mostly because the gas is really steam.
>
> http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse153.pdf for a detailed analysis.
Actually, I took a look at one of those 'experiments' on youtube.
The promoters of the idea claim that 'pulsing' the current at high frequency is the key. In the youtube clip, the 'experimenter' was using a cheap clamp type DMM to measure the current.
What do you reckon the chances are that the frequency in use was well beyond the -3dB point of the meter's AC frequency response ?
Graham
Fred Kasner
And since the vibration frequency of the water molecule is in the
infra-red, tell me how some electronic circuit is capable of produceing
such a frequency in the interest of breaking the bonds in water? The
idiot, JW, actually believes that lower frequency vibrations can be
stored up and eventually enough energy will be delivered to the bond to
break it. He thinks the other idiots have managed to violate the
principle that the bond can only absoorb energy of the vibration
frequency of the bond. In other words, "to hell with the laws of quantum
mechanics, my mind is made up" summarizes JW's understanding of the laws
of nature.
FK
Don Lancaster
on most any pulse waveform.
Always GROSSLY UNDERSTATING the result.
It is enormously difficult to measure the power of pulsed waveforms.
It most certainly can NOT be done with any reasonably priced DMM.
Depending on the duty cycle, the simultaneous voltage and current A/D
sampling would have be a mnimum of 100 to 1000 times the frequency of
the pulses being studied. Digital multiplication, of course, would be a
must for accurate power calculation.
The "research" is thus not even wrong.
ONLY the zero frequency term of any pulse waveform contributes
significantly to electrolysis. Although the highy nonlinear cell may in
fact create additional zero frequency terms through its highly
inefficient rectification.
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse153.pdf for a detailed analysis.
--
knews4...@yahoo.com
> Eeyore wrote:
>
> > Don Lancaster wrote:
>
> >>Eeyore wrote:
>
>
> >>>>http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf
>
> >>>" Non-Faradic generation of hydrogen gas is sometimes 80 times higher than the gas from normal electrolysis. Excess > hydrogen has proved difficult to replicate by other laboratories, although we are able to reproduce it regularly. "
>
> >>>I wonder why that is.
>
> >>Mostly because the gas is really steam.
>
>
> > Actually, I took a look at one of those 'experiments' on youtube.
>
> > The promoters of the idea claim that 'pulsing' the current at high frequency is the key. In the youtube clip, the 'experimenter' was using a cheap clamp type DMM to measure the current.
>
> > What do you reckon the chances are that the frequency in use was well beyond the -3dB point of the meter's AC frequency response ?
>
> > Graham
>
> More fundamentally, the crest factor would make the meter lie like a rug
> on most any pulse waveform.
>
> Always GROSSLY UNDERSTATING the result.
>
> It is enormously difficult to measure the power of pulsed waveforms.
> It most certainly can NOT be done with any reasonably priced DMM.
>
> Depending on the duty cycle, the simultaneous voltage and current A/D
> sampling would have be a mnimum of 100 to 1000 times the frequency of
> the pulses being studied. Digital multiplication, of course, would be a
> must for accurate power calculation.
>
> The "research" is thus not even wrong.
>
> ONLY the zero frequency term of any pulse waveform contributes
> significantly to electrolysis. Although the highy nonlinear cell may in
> fact create additional zero frequency terms through its highly
> inefficient rectification.
>
>
> --
> Many thanks,
>
<snip Donny's shamless plug>
It isn't electrolysis.
No electrolyte.
No appreciable current consumed.
NO HEAT AFTER HOURS OF OPERATION.
But you know all that.
Try watching the Meyer video of his explaination.
http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/index.php?sid=db12475327496042ca0e9a3fc5408be5
It might give you a "clue."
Eeyore
knews4...@yahoo.com wrote:
> It isn't electrolysis.
The ultimate denial of reality.
> No electrolyte.
Unless the water is completely de-ionised you absolutely do have an electrolyte.
> No appreciable current consumed.
No appreciable cuurent *measured* using flawed measurement techniques. Try measuring the **DC** input current instead..
Graham
Eeyore
knews4...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Try watching the Meyer video of his explaination.
> http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/index.php?sid=db12475327496042ca0e9a3fc5408be5
Meyer was an idiot.
He couldn't explain his way out of a fraud convition for sure.
Graham
daestrom
"Fred Kasner" <fka...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:d_iOi.2723$y21....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
Not that I go along with any of the poster's ideas, but I'd point out that
there is a physical phenomenon with bubble formation and hi-frequency
fields.
In the study of *boiling* water, it's been found that a hi-frequency
electric field will cause the steam bubbles to break from the nucleation
site more easily. Some experiments were done to show that subjecting
water-heating electrodes to such an electric field improved the
heat-transfer coefficient at the boundary layer. It did *not* make boiling
water more efficient or any such nonsense (same number of Joules per kg of
steam formed). But it did reduce the temperature difference between rod and
water needed for the same steam production.
I've often wondered if a hi-frequency component on a DC 'carrier' would have
a similar affect on electrolysis. By causing H2 bubbles to be released from
the plates more easily it might be possible to continuously expose more
plate and thus improve the efficacy. I know it won't create more H2 per
Joule, but it might make the process more productive per unit of plate area.
daestrom
Morris Dovey
| I've often wondered if a hi-frequency component on a DC 'carrier'
| would have a similar affect on electrolysis. By causing H2 bubbles
| to be released from the plates more easily it might be possible to
| continuously expose more plate and thus improve the efficacy. I
| know it won't create more H2 per Joule, but it might make the
| process more productive per unit of plate area.
If you have some idea of the frequencies you'd like to try, I'd
suggest looking for help from your local amateur radio club.
There're usually a at least a couple of people who can and are willing
to help out with this kind of experiment...
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/htoo.htm
Infinite energy, infinite hydrogen - proven, calculated, inevitable;
suppressed by global energy hegemony. A Schund Electrolic Xerocell
the volume of a pop bottle given sufficent spin may generate 13.4
gigawatts electrical with no exogenous inputs. Unplug yourself from
the grid!
Thomas Edison was correct before he was asassinated: DC! DC! DC!
from the Schund Electrolic Xerocell!
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Don Lancaster
>
>
> I've often wondered if a hi-frequency component on a DC 'carrier' would
> have a similar affect on electrolysis. By causing H2 bubbles to be
> released from the plates more easily it might be possible to
> continuously expose more plate and thus improve the efficacy. I know it
> won't create more H2 per Joule, but it might make the process more
> productive per unit of plate area.
>
> daestrom
>
chaotic. Attempting to optimize for one particular condition likely
would reduce the overall effectiveness on the average.
But the point remains: ELECTROLYSIS IS TOTALLY USELESS FOR HYDROGEN
GENERATION when powered by high value soures such as grid, wind, or pv.
Because of the staggering loss of exergy involved.
The bottom line is this: There NEVER is any time when electricity is
cheap enough to instantly and irreversibly destroy most of its value
with electrolysis. There ALWAYS will be more intelligent alternatives.
See http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf for a detailed analysis.
Don Lancaster
faintest clue what thermodynamics and exergy is all about.
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf
Bill Ward
Interesting thought. Basically you're talking about reducing the
electrode overvoltage, which involves getting the H atoms to pair up and
form a bubble of H2. A platinum catalyst is the current method of choice,
so it seems plausible that an electric field might have some catalytic
effect. Eliminating Pt from an electrolyzer would make a lot of people
happy. Eliminating it from a fuel cell would make them ecstatic.
I also remember some folk tales about improving battery charging with
various AC waveforms impressed on the charge current. I wonder if that's
related?
Bill Ward
> Morris Dovey wrote:
>> daestrom wrote:
>>
>> | I've often wondered if a hi-frequency component on a DC 'carrier'
>> | would have a similar affect on electrolysis. By causing H2 bubbles to
>> | be released from the plates more easily it might be possible to
>> | continuously expose more plate and thus improve the efficacy. I know
>> | it won't create more H2 per Joule, but it might make the process more
>> | productive per unit of plate area.
>>
>> If you have some idea of the frequencies you'd like to try, I'd suggest
>> looking for help from your local amateur radio club.
>>
>> There're usually a at least a couple of people who can and are willing
>> to help out with this kind of experiment...
>>
>> --
>> Morris Dovey
>> DeSoto Solar
>> DeSoto, Iowa USA
>> http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
>>
>>
> The experiment is utterly and totally pointless to anyone with even the
> faintest clue what thermodynamics and exergy is all about.
Now, Don. There's nothing wrong with looking for some means other than
Pt to reduce overvoltage. If the efficiency gained is more than that lost
in the process, you come out ahead without violating any laws. It's just
another form of catalysis.
Don Lancaster
>
> I also remember some folk tales about improving battery charging with
> various AC waveforms impressed on the charge current. I wonder if that's
> related?
>
>
>
Standard process used on forklift batteries.
Works like a champ.
Discussed at http://www.tinaja.com/glib/overbatt.pdf
Don Lancaster
If you reduced the overvoltage to zero, you STILL would have a way to
convert lots of high value kilowatt hours of energy into many fewer ones
of much lower value.
And thus totally useless.
hanson
wrote in message news:470A51DF...@hate.spam.net...
>>
> knews4...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/index.php?sid=db12475327496042ca0e9a3fc5408be5
>> Watch the videos.
>> Meyer explains why "Electricl Polarization" works different from
>> "Electrolysis."
>>
>> Much more there for the serious researcher and experimenter.
>
> http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/htoo.htm
>
> Infinite energy, infinite hydrogen - proven, calculated, inevitable;
> suppressed by global energy hegemony. A Schund Electrolic
> Xerocell > the volume of a pop bottle given sufficent spin may
> generate 13.4 gigawatts electrical with no exogenous inputs.
> Unplug yourself from the grid!
> Thomas Edison was correct before he was asassinated:
> DC! DC! DC! from the Schund Electrolic Xerocell!
> --
> Uncle Al
>
Yeah, yeah... indeed, indeed, Al. Your should develop your latest
(still somewhat cloaked and camouflaged) idea of your "Electrolic
Xerocell" much further. It is great and on the same magnificent
level as were your other past, seminal & $$-fortune producing
inventions like (1) your Cockroach repellent, (2) your kilogram
sized gem quality diamonds, (3) your Einstein defeating Eotvoes
chiral SiO2 balls and (4) your up- and coming Benzil XX for X-mas.
Kudos to you, Al... mostly for the laughs!... ahahaha.... ahanson
Bill Ward
But interesting, nonetheless.
Morris Dovey
| Morris Dovey wrote:
|| daestrom wrote:
||
||| I've often wondered if a hi-frequency component on a DC 'carrier'
||| would have a similar affect on electrolysis. By causing H2
||| bubbles to be released from the plates more easily it might be
||| possible to continuously expose more plate and thus improve the
||| efficacy. I know it won't create more H2 per Joule, but it might
||| make the process more productive per unit of plate area.
||
|| If you have some idea of the frequencies you'd like to try, I'd
|| suggest looking for help from your local amateur radio club.
||
|| There're usually a at least a couple of people who can and are
|| willing to help out with this kind of experiment...
||
| the faintest clue what thermodynamics and exergy is all about.
|
| http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf
Perhaps we have differing notions of what makes an experiment
"pointful". I'm inclined to think that an experiment is worth
performing if it provides insight or understanding that wasn't there
before.
Belittling someone who lacks your own understanding, but is who is
nonetheless capable of wondering - and of designing his own experiment
to satisfy his curiosity seems unworthy of you.
I expected better.
Don Lancaster
I expected worse.
An hour on the web is worth a month in the lab.
If you do not believe in Faraday, you have to have some credible
justification for that belief. An observable, quantifiable and
unambiguously independently duplicatable unquestionable hard core result.
One that countless tens of thousands of daily repeated experiments do
not overwhemingly fly in the face of. And not one that thermodynamic
fundamentals involving exergy ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE ain't gonna happen.
And one that goes beyond obvious incompetence and instruments that
clearly lie like a rug. While making the same stupid mistakes that
everybody else does.
The point is that if they refuse to admit they don't even have the
necessary background and tools, and refuse to try and prove themselves
wrong, and refuse to ask for help, nothing whatsoever is accomplished.
If anything, it self-perpetuates.
Thermodynamic fundamentals ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE the Meyer experiment is
(A) Not even wrong, and (B) not remotely worth pissing over.
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf and
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse153.pdf and
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/bashpseu.pdf for tutorials.
Bob Eld
"Don Lancaster" <d...@tinaja.com> wrote in message
news:5mva0qF...@mid.individual.net...
> Morris Dovey wrote:
> > daestrom wrote:
> >
> > | I've often wondered if a hi-frequency component on a DC 'carrier'
> > | would have a similar affect on electrolysis. By causing H2 bubbles
> > | to be released from the plates more easily it might be possible to
> > | continuously expose more plate and thus improve the efficacy. I
> > | know it won't create more H2 per Joule, but it might make the
> > | process more productive per unit of plate area.
> >
> > If you have some idea of the frequencies you'd like to try, I'd
> > suggest looking for help from your local amateur radio club.
> >
> > There're usually a at least a couple of people who can and are willing
> > to help out with this kind of experiment...
> >
> > --
> > Morris Dovey
> > DeSoto Solar
> > DeSoto, Iowa USA
> > http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
> >
> >
> The experiment is utterly and totally pointless to anyone with even the
> faintest clue what thermodynamics and exergy is all about.
It seems the US is doing a pretty good job of converting Dollars into Pesos
with out any help from electrolysis or other hydrogen scam.
Checked the value of the Dollar lately?
Morris Dovey
|
| An hour on the web is worth a month in the lab.
[ posting from sci.energy... ]
Hmmm. My mileage varies somewhat on this one. I've found more garbage
on the Internet than I ever encountered in any of the labs in which
I've worked. There /is/ good info to be had on the web, but there's a
definite sorting obstacle.
| If you do not believe in Faraday, you have to have some credible
| justification for that belief. An observable, quantifiable and
| unambiguously independently duplicatable unquestionable hard core
| result,
|
| One that countless tens of thousands of daily repeated experiments
| do not overwhemingly fly in the face of. And not one that
| thermodynamic fundamentals involving exergy ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE
| ain't gonna happen.
|
| And one that goes beyond obvious incompetence and instruments that
| clearly lie like a rug. While making the same stupid mistakes that
| everybody else does.
|
| The point is that if they refuse to admit they don't even have the
| necessary background and tools, and refuse to try and prove
| themselves wrong, and refuse to ask for help, nothing whatsoever is
| accomplished.
Wow. I think I could understand where that diatribe came from if
daestrom exhibited Guth-like behavior, but I haven't ever seen that.
What I /have/ observed have been mostly thoughtful, constructive
responses - a behavior that I've often wished more usenet posters
could manage.
That an experiment has already been performed and been well-documented
does not mean that it performing it again can't provide a worthwhile
learning experience and facilitate internalization/understanding of
the principles involved. Why else would (for example) a chemistry
course have a lab component?
IME, claims to the contrary are only made by those posessed of a petty
intellectual conceitedness - and by those who fear that others might
learn enough to pass them by.
If what you're saying is that an experiment is only worthwhile if it
provides _new_ knowledge, then I'm obliged to conclude that your
knowledge of the human learning process lags far behind your knowledge
of physical science.
I've read enough of your printed articles over the years to conclude
that you're a fairly bright guy - and to conclude that you can, in
fact, do better at helping others to learn - I'd like to encourage
that.
Don Lancaster
>
> That an experiment has already been performed and been well-documented
> does not mean that it performing it again can't provide a worthwhile
> learning experience and facilitate internalization/understanding of
> the principles involved.
Are you referring to a totally bogus and not even wrong and never
duplicated obvious scam "experiment" done by known fradulent charlatan
total incompetents with useless measuring instruments that clearly lie
like a rug;
Or the countless tens of thousands of daily careful Faraday's Law
verification experiments that conclusively prove the above experiment's
obvious bogosity beyone a shadow of doubt?
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse153.pdf
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/bashpseu.pdf
Morris Dovey
| Morris Dovey wrote:
||
|| That an experiment has already been performed and been
|| well-documented does not mean that it performing it again can't
|| provide a worthwhile learning experience and facilitate
|| internalization/understanding of the principles involved.
|
| duplicated obvious scam "experiment" done by known fradulent
| charlatan total incompetents with useless measuring instruments
| that clearly lie like a rug;
|
| Or the countless tens of thousands of daily careful Faraday's Law
| verification experiments that conclusively prove the above
| experiment's obvious bogosity beyone a shadow of doubt?
|
| http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse153.pdf
| http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf
| http://www.tinaja.com/glib/bashpseu.pdf
The post that I'd responded to was:
daestrom:<<
Not that I go along with any of the poster's ideas, but I'd point out
that
there is a physical phenomenon with bubble formation and hi-frequency
fields.
In the study of boiling water, it's been found that a hi-frequency
electric field will cause the steam bubbles to break from the
nucleation
site more easily. Some experiments were done to show that subjecting
water-heating electrodes to such an electric field improved the
heat-transfer coefficient at the boundary layer. It did not make
boiling
water more efficient or any such nonsense (same number of Joules per
kg of
steam formed). But it did reduce the temperature difference between
rod and
water needed for the same steam production.
I've often wondered if a hi-frequency component on a DC 'carrier'
would have
a similar affect on electrolysis. By causing H2 bubbles to be
released from
the plates more easily it might be possible to continuously expose
more
plate and thus improve the efficacy. I know it won't create more H2
per
Joule, but it might make the process more productive per unit of plate
area.
>>
to which I responded with the suggestion:
<<
If you have some idea of the frequencies you'd like to try, I'd
suggest looking for help from your local amateur radio club.
There're usually a at least a couple of people who can and are willing
to help out with this kind of experiment...
>>
Which seemed to have pulled your trigger. I hadn't intended to offend
anyone - and don't have much personal interest in screwing around with
hydrogen - /and/ have no expertise in the area. /My/ interest was only
to make it easier for someone to satisfy an "I wonder if..." question.
Frankly I neither know or care if it's a good experiment - but I am
reasonably optimistic that daestrom is capable of evaluating the
outcome.
Fred Kasner
More proof that you have a zero comprehension of the laws of physics.
Electrolyte? Water ionizes to a small extent and so there is some
electrolyte present: H+ and OH-
Current cannot be consumed. Current is a transfer of charges. And the
charge is conserved so it does not disapppear and can't be "consumed".
No process using AC is 100% efficient in such a manner as to not
generate no heat whatsoever. Even exceptionally good transformers lose a
few percent of the energy input and convert it to heat.
We know no such thing, idiot.
God, you are stupid. You actually believe all that crap? Or are you just
a fool who believes everything that others tell him.
You are clueless.
Wake up, JW, you know no science and so are incapable of vouching for
pseudoscience claims.
FK
RadicalModerate
> If you reduced the overvoltage to zero, you STILL would have a way to
> convert lots of high value kilowatt hours of energy into many fewer ones
> of much lower value.
> And thus totally useless.
Not if you're working with wind, tide, PV or some other intermittent
source, where at times you may have more electricity than you can use at
the moment. Using that excess to make hydrogen for later usage in a fuel
cell or gas turbine is increasing the value of power which otherwise would
go to waste.
--
The published From: address is a trap.
Eeyore
RadicalModerate wrote:
BUT, that power cost a fortune to make in the first place (capital cost of that
generation).
Sorry, there's no free lunch. Energy efficiency beats alternative generation
hands down.
Graham
Dan Bloomquist
RadicalModerate wrote:
> In sci.energy.hydrogen Don Lancaster <d...@tinaja.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>If you reduced the overvoltage to zero, you STILL would have a way to
>>convert lots of high value kilowatt hours of energy into many fewer ones
>>of much lower value.
>
>
>>And thus totally useless.
>
>
> Not if you're working with wind, tide, PV or some other intermittent
> source, where at times you may have more electricity than you can use at
> the moment.
First, storage is not even an issue at present production, and unlikely
to be an issue for decades.
Second, you would create new pumped storage at 80% for less than a buck
a watt in today's dollars. You would not create hydrogen storage at 25%
for several bucks a watt.
Don Lancaster
Not even wrong.
PV, water, or wind are precisely the WRONG sources for electrolysis
because of their extremely high exergy.
The irreversible destruction of value during electrolysis is intolerable
from any high value source.
Electricity NEVER gets cheap enough for electrolysis to make sense.
There ALWAYS will be more intelligent uses for it instead of immediately
and permanently and irreversibly destroying most of its value.
Smelt some aluminum or refine some copper instead.
Or use pumped storage.
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf
http://www.tinaja.com//glib/muse153.pdf
BradGuth
> http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/index.php?sid=db12475327496042ca0e9a3...
>
> Watch the videos.
> Meyer explains why "Electricl Polarization" works different from
> "Electrolysis."
>
At least this is offering an affordable step that's taking us in the
right direction. The makings of H2/LH2 is going to be the key to our
viable fossil/synfuel future, that is if certain fossil and yellowcake
energy bigots and their puppet warlords allow us to survive long
enough.
Not that UTC(United Technologies Corp.) is the one and only fuel cell
provider of commercial utility energy that's end-user and
environmentally friendly.
Largest U.S. Commercial Fuel Cell System Powers Long Island Call
Center & Administration Building
http://www.utc.com/press/releases/2005-09-21.htm
"SOUTH WINDSOR, CT, September 21, 2005 -- The country's largest fuel
cell power plant in commercial operation is being commissioned today
in Long Island, N.Y. UTC Power, a division of United Technologies
Corp. (NYSE:UTX), provided seven PureCell™ 200s to the project, which
generates 1.4 megawatts of primary electrical power and 6.3 million
BTUs of useable heat for Verizon Communications, Inc."
"A fuel cell is an electrochemical device that combines hydrogen or
hydrogen-rich fuel, and oxygen to produce electricity, heat and water.
Fuel cells operate without combustion, making them virtually pollution
free. While a traditional generating system produces as much as 25
pounds of pollutants to generate 1,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity,
the PureCell™ 200 power plant produces less than an ounce."
http://www.utcpower.com/fs/com/bin/fs_com_Page/0,11491,0236,00.html
http://www.utcpower.com/fs/com/bin/fs_com_Page/0,11491,047,00.html
http://www.utcpower.com/fs/com/bin/fs_com_Page/0,11491,0104,00.html
http://www.utcpower.com/fs/com/bin/fs_com_Page/0,11491,0122,00.html
In spite of all the semitic flak that's continually opposing any and
all such energy alternatives, especially it they are based upon clean
and renewable alternatives, whereas it seems all we need is to
expedite upon the most viable alternatives of clean renewable energy
to be creating those necessary volumes of H2, or even for otherwise
creating h2o2 for directly utilizing along with our spendy fossil/
synfuel reserves that are getting towards the bottom of that dirty and
somewhat bloody barrel or even the cubic meter worth of coal that
would burn really clean and hot if getting the benefits of h2o2
instead of forcing its combustion via our mostly N2 atmosphere and
fresh water. The likes of Warren Buffett, William Mook and
myself(Brad Guth) have been doing just that, by having been creating
such energy alternatives and/or strongly suggesting as to how we
should go about accomplishing this task.
It doesn't really matter where the natural/renewable energy is derived
from, it just needs to get with the process of creating those volumes
of H2 and tonnes of h2o2 before it's too late (meaning WW-III).
- Brad Guth -
BradGuth
> http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/index.php?sid=db12475327496042ca0e9a3...
>
> Watch the videos.
> Meyer explains why "Electricl Polarization" works different from
> "Electrolysis."
>
> Much more there for the serious researcher and experimenter.
At least this topic has been offering an affordable step that's taking
us in the right direction. The makings of H2/LH2 and even h2o2 is
going to become the key to our viable fossil/synfuel future, that is
if certain fossil and yellowcake energy bigots and their puppet
warlords even allow us to survive long enough to fight another one of
their global energy domination wars.
As per usenet usual, those pesky semitic brown-nosed energy clowns are
still in charge of ENRON/ExxonMobil damage control. But what the
heck, I'll just keep improving my topics along with my need-to-know
limited knowledge and expertise of viable options in spite of their
faith-based gauntlet of such profound naysayism that would obviously
much rather back the likes of Hitler any dark pagan day of their
global polluting week.
Now that far too many of us can't afford to keep our homes financed,
much less put an Exxon tiger in our tank, as well as having half of
California on fire because of the global warming trend, plus the
southeast and southern states continually flooding and Greenland
physically rising because of the extensive ice melt, it's our very own
semitic(aka pretend atheist) infomercial spewing bigots like yourself
and naysayers like Don Lancaster that gave the likes of your puppet
Hitler exactly what they wanted, and having systematically used
against your own kind. Way to go, Michael A. Terrell, Don Lancaster,
Eeyore and so many others of your mainstream status quo (aka GW Bush
stay the course) kind that want as much global pollution and
subsequent warming as you infomercial faith-based spewing bigots can
muster, at the same time insuring that all commercial forms of energy
remain as spendy and/or as bloody as possible.
For our personal and commercial transportation, H2O2 as offering a
squeaky clean energy density is simply the best kind of renewable
liquid synfuel energy alternative on Earth, especially with utilized
along with certain other fossil/synfuels and pretty much regardless of
however it's being made via PV, wind, tidal or geothermal (of which
there's no such shortage of those alternatives, not to mention certain
off-world options). H2/LH2 is just as doable and every bit as usable
for much of the same plus a few other good reasons. All we need is a
surplus of clean and renewable energy to start with, such as becoming
available from Warren Buffett, eventually William Mook and myself if
need be.
"Water Fuel Cell Research Site"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy.hydrogen/browse_frm/thread/1b9d07381a7ab38e/398f37cdafa0dc9a#398f37cdafa0dc9a
At least this is offering an affordable step that's taking us in the
right direction. The various makings of H2/LH2 (including those of
William Mook) is going to be the key to our viable fossil/synfuel
future, that is if certain fossil and yellowcake energy bigots and
their puppet warlords allow us to survive long enough, and those of
Goggle/NOVA's pesky semitic usenet rusemasters of spermware/fuckware
can be kept from continually trashing our PC/MAC computers in the
process.
would burn really clean and hot at the very least amount of CO2 and
potentially zero NOx if it were getting the full benefits of h2o2
BradGuth
> On Oct 7, 11:49 pm, Don Lancaster <d...@tinaja.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Eeyore wrote:
>
> > > Don Lancaster wrote:
>
> > >>Eeyore wrote:
>
> > >>>knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > >>>>http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf
>
> > >>>" Non-Faradic generation of hydrogen gas is sometimes 80 times higher than the gas from normal electrolysis. Excess > hydrogen has proved difficult to replicate by other laboratories, although we are able to reproduce it regularly. "
>
> > >>>I wonder why that is.
>
> > >>Mostly because the gas is really steam.
>
>
> > > Actually, I took a look at one of those 'experiments' on youtube.
>
> > > The promoters of the idea claim that 'pulsing' the current at high frequency is the key. In the youtube clip, the 'experimenter' was using a cheap clamp type DMM to measure the current.
>
> > > What do you reckon the chances are that the frequency in use was well beyond the -3dB point of the meter's AC frequency response ?
>
> > > Graham
>
> > More fundamentally, the crest factor would make the meter lie like a rug
> > on most any pulse waveform.
>
> > Always GROSSLY UNDERSTATING the result.
>
> > It is enormously difficult to measure the power of pulsed waveforms.
> > It most certainly can NOT be done with any reasonably priced DMM.
>
> > Depending on the duty cycle, the simultaneous voltage and current A/D
> > sampling would have be a mnimum of 100 to 1000 times the frequency of
> > the pulses being studied. Digital multiplication, of course, would be a
> > must for accurate power calculation.
>
> > The "research" is thus not even wrong.
>
> > ONLY the zero frequency term of any pulse waveform contributes
> > significantly to electrolysis. Although the highy nonlinear cell may in
> > fact create additional zero frequency terms through its highly
> > inefficient rectification.
>
>
> > --
> > Many thanks,
>
> <snip Donny's shamless plug>
>
> It isn't electrolysis.
> No electrolyte.
> No appreciable current consumed.
> NO HEAT AFTER HOURS OF OPERATION.
> But you know all that.
>
> It might give you a "clue."
Our all-knowing Rabbi Don Lancaster doesn't need clues, because he's
our God in charge of global polluting and warming until all non-
semitic or non-yiddish souls on Earth are either flat energy busted or
dead.
There's actually quite a lot which our Don Lancaster and others of his
kind doesn't believe in, such as for using those regular laws of
physics or the best available science which simply doesn't count, and
that's no matters what the consequences to boot.
- Brad Guth -
BradGuth
> On Oct 7, 11:09 am, Don Lancaster <d...@tinaja.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Eeyore wrote:
>
> > > knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > >>http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf
>
>
> > > I wonder why that is.
>
>
> > Mostly because the gas is really steam.
>
> >http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse153.pdffora detailed analysis.
>
> > Many thanks,
>
> > Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
> > Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
> > rss:http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: d...@tinaja.com
>
>
> Sure it is Donny.
> This from a guy who has never been within a hundred miles of a working
> cell....
> But don't worry. The succussful experimenters and researchers don't
> need your permission to build a proper cell.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Our Don Lancaster is an official usenet naysayer, just like most every
other silly infomercial spewing Yid that doesn't give any honest hocky
puck about deriving or much less utilizing any of those sorts of clean
and renewable energy, as to what Warren Buffett, William Moom/(aka
Willie.Moo) or myself can deliver.
Unlike yourself, I tend to directly blame most everyone in usenetland
for the absolutely horrific mess of collateral damage and ongoing
carnage plus spendy fuel/energy alternatives that'll only further
pollute the badly failing environment we're in, and to think that it's
only going to get a whole lot worse, isn't it, as only but a few of us
honest souls actually give a tinkers damn of fixing anything.
As per usenet usual, those pesky semitic brown-nosed energy clowns of
our Skull and Bones cult are still in charge of our ENRON/ExxonMobil
damage control, to stay that course of a thousand fossil and
yellowcake illuminated lights without so much as a speck of remorse.
But what the heck, I'll just keep improving my topics along with
sharing my need-to-know limited knowledge and expertise of viable
options in spite of their faith-based gauntlet of such profound
naysayism that would obviously much rather support the likes of Hitler
any dark pagan day of their global polluting mindset week.
Now that far too many of us can't afford to keep our homes financed,
much less put an Exxon tiger in our tank, as well as having half of
California on fire because of the global warming trend, plus having
our southeast and southern states continually flooding, along with
Greenland physically rising because of the extensive ice melt, whereas
it's our very own semitic(aka pretend atheist) infomercial spewing
bigots and naysayers like our Michael A. Terrell, Don Lancaster and
Eeyore that seldom if ever contribute solutions but otherwise gave the
likes of their puppet Hitler exactly whatever those bastards wanted,
having systematically used such a ruse formulated mindset against
their own kind. Way to go, Michael A. Terrell, Don Lancaster, Eeyore
and so many others of your mainstream status quo (aka GW Bush stay the
course) kind that want to see as much global pollution and subsequent
warming as you infomercial faith-based spewing bigots can muster, at
the same time insuring that all commercial forms of energy remain as
spendy and/or as bloody as possible.
For our personal and commercial transportation, h2o2 as offering a
squeaky clean energy density is simply the best kind of renewable
liquid synfuel energy alternative on Earth, especially when utilized
along with certain other fossil/synfuels and pretty much nifty
regardless of however it's being made via PV, wind, tidal or
geothermal (of which there's no such shortage of those alternatives,
not to mention certain off-world options). H2/LH2 is just as doable
and every bit as usable for much of the same plus a few other good
reasons. All we need is a surplus of clean and renewable energy to
start with, such as becoming available from Warren Buffett, eventually
William Mook and myself if need be.
At least this following topic has been offering an affordable step
that's taking us in the right direction. The makings of H2/LH2 and
even h2o2 is going to become the key to our viable fossil/synfuel
future, that is if certain fossil and yellowcake energy bigots and
their puppet warlords even allow us to survive long enough to fight
another one of their global energy domination wars.
"Water Fuel Cell Research Site"
expedite upon the most viable of clean renewable energy to be creating
those necessary volumes of H2, or even for otherwise creating h2o2 for
directly utilizing along with our spendy fossil/synfuel reserves that
are getting towards the bottom of that dirty and somewhat bloody
barrel or even the cubic meter worth of coal that would burn really
clean and hot at the very least amount of CO2 and potentially zero NOx
if it were getting the full benefits of h2o2 instead of forcing its
combustion via our mostly N2 atmosphere and fresh water. The likes of
Warren Buffett, William Mook and myself(Brad Guth) have been doing
just that, by having been creating such energy alternatives and/or
strongly suggesting as to how we should go about accomplishing this
task.
It doesn't really matter where the natural/renewable energy is being
derived from, it just needs to get with the process of creating those
volumes of H2 and tonnes of h2o2 before it's too late (meaning WW-
III).
BTW, isn't 100+ empg per hybrid fossil gallon and zero NOx worth
anything these days?
- Brad Guth -
gdew...@gmail.com
> knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Oct 6, 9:33 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>knews4u2c...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>>http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/index.php?sid=db12475327496042ca0e9a3...
>
> >>>Watch the videos.
> >>>"Electrolysis."
>
> >>>Much more there for the serious researcher and experimenter.
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md8-wvV2jHM
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9XrLOudwRw&mode=related&search=
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiA4z_Kpgg4&mode=related&search=
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJPE6d2R9uo&mode=related&search=
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fFp3CJZMTw&mode=related&search=
>
> Repetition does not make a truth. Why act like all the rest of the idiots?
Repetition does not make a truth?
hahaha
Repetition does not make a truth? Repetition does not make a truth?
anyway, this is interesting stuff. interesting lol
Thanks Dan. :-)
gdew...@gmail.com
> As per usenet usual, those pesky semitic brown-nosed energy clowns are
> still in charge of ENRON/ExxonMobil damage control. But what the
> heck, I'll just keep improving my topics along with my need-to-know
> limited knowledge and expertise of viable options in spite of their
> faith-based gauntlet of such profound naysayism that would obviously
> much rather back the likes of Hitler any dark pagan day of their
> global polluting week.
>
"the FBI is working with ExxonMobil corporate security to determine
the motivation or intent of the noose-hanging incident."
http://www.myfoxhouston.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=4935534&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1
MyFox Houston | FBI Investigating ExxonMobil Nooses Found
O_O