Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

Forget electric cars - enough oil for 100 more years!


Kako e2
8 143
16 Jul 2013 4:50PM
brian1208, I said "cars that run on water..." deliberately to make the distinction between these, and those that are hydrogen powered using hydrogen stored in tanks, which is what most of the public think of when the mention of hydrogen power is discussed. As we both know,' hydrogen on demand' is a totally different game changer and has already been demonstrated. If the world's major car companies were forced by public demand to introduce these cars then you and I could be driving them within 5 years.

As for the oil companies, well its all documented in hundreds of books and articles over decades. I remember reading "The Seven Sisters" by Anthony Sampson decades ago, well before the
hackneyed phrase 'Conspiracy theorist' was invented detailing the massive corruption and downright criminal activity perpetrated by these companies as they bought and controlled entire countries. Nothing has changed except that thanks to the internet more people are aware of this now.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
16 Jul 2013 4:57PM

Quote:brian1208, I said "cars that run on water..." deliberately to make the distinction between these, and those that are hydrogen powered using hydrogen stored in tanks


Well the cars don`t actually run on the water, they run on the gas produced by the water, it can be done, but I don`t think we are quite there yet.
brian1208 e2
11 10.6k 12 United Kingdom
16 Jul 2013 5:28PM

Quote:they run on the gas produced by the water, it can be done, but I don`t think we are quite there yet.



Quote:This article focuses on vehicles that claim to extract chemical potential energy directly from water. Water is fully oxidized hydrogen. Hydrogen itself is a high-energy, flammable substance, but its useful energy is released when water is formedówater will not burn. The process of electrolysis, discussed below, would split water into hydrogen and oxygen, but it takes as much energy to take apart a water molecule as was released when the hydrogen was oxidized to form water. In fact, some energy would be lost in converting water to hydrogen and then burning the hydrogen because some waste heat would always be produced in the conversions. Releasing chemical energy from water, in excess or in equal proportion to the energy required to facilitate such production, would therefore violate the first and/or second laws of thermodynamics.[5][6][7][8]


from

thermodynamics screws up many apparent wonderful sources of energy.

There is some hope that alternative processes, such as here are being looked at but are still some way off.

The big problem with the hydrogen economy is the distribution network. A colleague and I looked into this, at a fairly low level, as a blue sky project back in the '70's. There are many sources of cheap hydrogen, mainly the use of hydro-electric power at that time, but how to get it to where it was needed and then distribute it was the problem

More promising research could be in the field of algal produced hydrocarbons using photosynthesis as referenced here:

hydrocarbon from biomass

the benefits of this are that the distribution infra-structure already exists, its carbon neutral and it provides a source of hydrocarbon feedstock for many of the essential petro-chemical products that most forget we need (if indeed they ever knew of there existence)
dcash29 e2
9 2.0k England
16 Jul 2013 5:43PM

Quote:Brian 1208 I'd love to see your evidence for this, its the same as they were claiming that the Oilcos suppressed a "Water Burning Engine" back in the '70's


Brian, you'll have to do your own searching. In the 70's an engine technician at Ford re-engineered a Pinto engine to achieve 70-80 mpg.....disappeared?

Go through the past records of the Rochdale Observer and find ...Lancaster Uni. Professor from Rochdale develops oil alternative, when mixed with cold tea third world wagons and Skoda's could achieve double their life expectancy without wear. Again disappeared in the 80's.

Talking of water burning engines, where has the French car developed two years ago disappeared to?
keithh e2
11 23.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
16 Jul 2013 6:00PM
Disappeared from Google as well.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
16 Jul 2013 7:08PM
brian1208 e2
11 10.6k 12 United Kingdom
16 Jul 2013 7:34PM

Quote:Brian, you'll have to do your own searching


OK, here we go:

here

here

here

and more


here

here

but then

another view

and another

another

I do realise that the laws of science can never get in the way of belief (but it makes for an amusing discussion Grin )
llareggub e2
4 757 United Kingdom
16 Jul 2013 7:47PM

Quote:

(I do realise that the laws of science can never get in the way of belief (but it makes for an amusing discussion Grin )



Just to play devils advocate (for a laugh you understand), I don't believe that there are 'laws of science', are they not just the best understanding that we have at the present time and are they not continually refined?

There is always room for a pedant Wink But I agree that there is nothing like a belief to get in the way of demonstrable data!
keithh e2
11 23.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
16 Jul 2013 7:57PM
It's the idea that these oil companies are going around bumping off anybody who invents a new type of engine or fuel.

Headline: Man in Wolverhampton invents water powered car.

Man in Wolverhampton: "No I didn't"
llareggub e2
4 757 United Kingdom
16 Jul 2013 8:05PM

Quote:It's the idea that these oil companies are going around bumping off anybody who invents a new type of engine or fuel.

Headline: Man in Wolverhampton invents water powered car.

Man in Wolverhampton: "No I didn't"



Man in Wolverhampton would say 'nae I den't, wots a caaaah'!
brian1208 e2
11 10.6k 12 United Kingdom
16 Jul 2013 8:25PM

Quote:Just to play devils advocate (for a laugh you understand), I don't believe that there are 'laws of science', are they not just the best understanding that we have at the present time and are they not continually refined?



so very true, but its a useful short hand for summarising the current understanding of the so far working hypotheses that describe how nature works and which provide a framework for understanding things like engineering, technology etc

this explains it much better than wot I ever could Wink


Quote:While scientific theories and laws are both based on hypotheses, a scientific theory is an explanation of the observed phenomenon, while a scientific law is a description of an observed phenomenon.

Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion, for example, describe the motions of planets but do not provide an explanation for their movements.

Both scientific laws and theories are supported by a large body of empirical data; both help unify a particular field of scientific study; and both are widely accepted by the vast majority of scientists within a discipline.
- See more at: http://www.livescience.com/21457-what-is-a-law-in-science-definition-of-scientific-law.html#sthash.qo7RymmO.dpuf

Niknut e2
4 740 64 United Kingdom
16 Jul 2013 8:30PM
Man in Wolverhampton would say 'nae I den't, wots a caaaah'!


The real pronunciation is......"No Are Day Chap !!!!!!, wee Doe No Wot Carsam anyroad !!!!", thers lots darn Noo'ampt'n Rowed thow !!!"

From a Wulfrunian.........GrinGrin
brian1208 e2
11 10.6k 12 United Kingdom
16 Jul 2013 8:32PM

Quote:It's the idea that these oil companies are going around bumping off anybody who invents a new type of engine or fuel.


But, "Everybody knows its true" (tell a lie often enough and it becomes accepted truth Wink )

I find it more difficult to believe that people don't realise that the formation of water from hydrogen and oxygen is extremely exothermic, removing energy from the reaction and leaving water in such a low energy state that its incapable of being useful as an energy source, unless its returned to its higher energy components (by the application of external energy such as electricity, solar energy, chemical reaction (with or without catalysis) etc )

Not forgetting of course that if you raise water high enough physically it can have enormous potential energy, but apart from generating electricity to charge batteries or separate water into hydrogen and oxygen electrolytically, but it ain't no use in the fuel tank of a car!

there is no free lunch in Nature
keithh e2
11 23.4k 33 Wallis And Futuna
16 Jul 2013 8:37PM

Quote:there is no free lunch in Nature


Unless you're a Kingfisher
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
16 Jul 2013 8:45PM
I thought this looked fun, my old Murry only went at about 4 mph Smile

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akaanteVCs4

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.