Stupid World

[Scuba_Steve]

One of America's greatest Hero's... Edward Snowden

29yrs old, ex-CIA & now fugitive for doing right

[Fergus]

Good job we have a powerful engine packed with a fuckload of energy called the sky then eh.

A fuckload of energy? I did it using an exceptionally crude devices and a PC power supply, and then all it takes is a spark to release that energy. That's a fuckload less energy than goes into creating all of the components that go together to get oil out of the ground before processing it into petrol.

In which case you can't say that a car runs on petrol given that it is refined before putting it into to tank... kinda.

Do you seriously think that the energy required to create a fuel is less than extracting a fuel out of the ground?

the energy input required to split hydrogen from water (an endothermic reaction) is EXACTLY equal to the energy released when the reaction is reversed (ie the hydrogen is burnt). it is 241.82kJ/mol, and can be found in enthalpy (energy) of formation tables in any elementary chemisty text.

Any other result would conflict with the Law of Conservation of Energy and would require a total rewrite of our understanding of the universe.

This is why most scientist don't engage with water powered engine crazies/Intelligent designers/climate change deniers ect; their are at best, bad science and often not science at all (falsifiable, observable, repeatable ect), debating would give unwarranted credibility to pseudoscience which is harmful to true science. (Or maybe "the scientist's have all been bought out by big corporations, man, open your eyes sheeple ect ect")



The most efficient water -> hydrogen method/s are around 50% efficient, so half of the energy input is lost, resulting in a net energy loss of 50%.
Refining oil (including energy consumed during extraction) uses 20% of the energy extracted so a net energy gain of 80%.



Hydrogen is a good contender as a energy carrier, but it will never be an energy source, as there is no great stockpile of hydrogen laying around for us. It must be created at a cost of 241.83kJ/mol and As with all energy conversions, it is a process with a net energy loss.

FYI most hydrogen is created from fossil fuels (80% efficient) and most is used to produce fertilizer.

[MisterD]

And John Key has taken away our rights to protest at sea....

No, he hasn't, he's just made it an offence to interfere with someone going about their legal business and said you have to keep 500m away.

[gwigs]

No, he hasn't, he's just made it an offence to interfere with someone going about their legal business and said you have to keep 500m away.

Equates to the same thing as far as I,m concerned...
And I,d volunteer to protest at sea and be arrested for it....
John Key is just looking out for his corporate buddies....
Its all about greed and profit...with no consideration to the environment..

[unstuck]

Yeah, and the earth was flat for millions of fucking years, until someone said" I wonder". Damn science boffins are getting shit wrong all the time.

[mashman]

ancient science wankery

Check out my big brain, check out my big brain... yes I missed the point entirely and read selectively from the post I quoted, but check out my big brain .

[mashman]

One of America's greatest Hero's... Edward Snowden

29yrs old, ex-CIA & now fugitive for doing right

Have you read any of the releases?

[Ocean1]

No, he hasn't, he's just made it an offence to interfere with someone going about their legal business and said you have to keep 500m away.

Which simply seeks to reinforce IMO shipping regulations. And probably allows action against transgressors in NZ law.

And now that I think about it may also seek to relieve the crown of responsibility for NZ registered vessels faced with litigation from other vessels going about their lawful business. Particularly fishing boats which have right-of-way over pretty much everything else out there.

[Ocean1]

Check out my big brain, check out my big brain... yes I missed the point entirely and read selectively from the post I quoted, but check out my big brain .

Admit it, you were wrong.

Again.

[Fergus]

Yeah, and the earth was flat for millions of fucking years, until someone said" I wonder". Damn science boffins are getting shit wrong all the time.

Congratulations, you (somewhat suprisingly..) understand how science works.

Here's some others examples for you:

People used to believe heavy objects fell faster, and then Galileo came along and showed that they were wrong.

People used to believe everything moved around the Earth, and then Copernicus came along and showed that they were wrong.

People used to believe all living things have always existed in their present form, and then Darwin came along and demonstrated that they were wrong.

Amazing innit?

[Fergus]

Check out my big brain, check out my big brain... yes I missed the point entirely and read selectively from the post I quoted, but check out my big brain .

Maybe you make your point more clear for me?

[avgas]

Do you seriously think that the energy required to create a fuel is less than extracting a fuel out of the ground?

the energy input required to split hydrogen from water (an endothermic reaction) is EXACTLY equal to the energy released when the reaction is reversed (ie the hydrogen is burnt). it is 241.82kJ/mol, and can be found in enthalpy (energy) of formation tables in any elementary chemisty text.

Any other result would conflict with the Law of Conservation of Energy and would require a total rewrite of our understanding of the universe.

This is why most scientist don't engage with water powered engine crazies/Intelligent designers/climate change deniers ect; their are at best, bad science and often not science at all (falsifiable, observable, repeatable ect), debating would give unwarranted credibility to pseudoscience which is harmful to true science. (Or maybe "the scientist's have all been bought out by big corporations, man, open your eyes sheeple ect ect")



The most efficient water -> hydrogen method/s are around 50% efficient, so half of the energy input is lost, resulting in a net energy loss of 50%.
Refining oil (including energy consumed during extraction) uses 20% of the energy extracted so a net energy gain of 80%.



Hydrogen is a good contender as a energy carrier, but it will never be an energy source, as there is no great stockpile of hydrogen laying around for us. It must be created at a cost of 241.83kJ/mol and As with all energy conversions, it is a process with a net energy loss.

FYI most hydrogen is created from fossil fuels (80% efficient) and most is used to produce fertilizer.

excuse me for my ignorance. How do these things work?
http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-...-all-ages.html

Not saying your wrong - just amazed that we can build cool kids toys like this, weld under water, land stuff on another planet..........but can't make a bigger version of this toy.
I suspect this toy is not as the label implies. Hydro-cell powered.

[mashman]

Admit it, you were wrong.

Again.

bwaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaa... so it takes less total energy to get oil from the ground, processed into petrol and into my tank than it would to get water into my tank.

Fergoos mentioned that the best one could hope for is 50% efficiency, what does the average fuel burning engine recoup efficiency wise?

Try again pops.

[oneofsix]

Congratulations, you (somewhat suprisingly..) understand how science works.

Here's some others examples for you:

People used to believe heavy objects fell faster, and then Galileo came along and showed that they were wrong.

People used to believe everything moved around the Earth, and then Copernicus came along and showed that they were wrong.

People used to believe all living things have always existed in their present form, and then Darwin came along and demonstrated that they were wrong.

Amazing innit?

Your example leaves out the input of real world "politics". In all the cases you quote people had "proven" long before that the prevailing theory was wrong, however due to current politics of the time the incorrect assumptions still prevailed.
Ancient Greeks/Chinese had proven the earth was round using sticks and shadows, got it to within a few k of the real circumference all before the Roman Empire had climbed off its 7 hills. However because the peeps and their masters wanted to believe it was flat that is what they believed, it was only when it became politically advantageous for it to be round did they look into that theory.

[Banditbandit]

excuse me for my ignorance. How do these things work?
http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-...-all-ages.html

Not saying your wrong - just amazed that we can build cool kids toys like this, weld under water, land stuff on another planet..........but can't make a bigger version of this toy.
I suspect this toy is not as the label implies. Hydro-cell powered.

Yeah .. but that is not the same as splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen .. and then burning the hydrogen

It takes a lot of energy to split water .... so much that it doesn't actually produce any extra energy -as Mashie points out above ... so the energy you use to split the water might as well be used as it comes (as it were) instead of wasting it to split water

Burning pre-existing monatomic is different ( or is it not monatomic hydrogen it burns?)