Burning salt water for fuel

[JAG]

Anyone catch this article? It's obviously in the early stages of discovery, but it's cool to dream about.

hxxp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070910/ap_on_sc/burning_seawater;_ylt=AtPPZQthzOOKK3NdiaIiSkQPLBIF



Radio frequencies help burn salt water Mon Sep 10, 5:35 PM ET

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."

___

Information from: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, http://www.post-gazette.com

[rkmsuf]

but if we burn all the salt water where will the fish live?

[MikeVic]

Doesn't sperm have salt in it or something? Can't we just all gather up enough and burn that? I'm sure there'll never be a shortage of male sperm.

That's what's wrong with our species. We need to utilize our human renewable resources more.

[rkmsuf]

Doesn't sperm have salt in it or something? Can't we just all gather up enough and burn that? I'm sure there'll never be a shortage of male sperm.

That's what's wrong with our species. We need to utilize our human renewable resources more.

I'm building a shitcoptor.

[cartman]

It does sound cool, but I wonder what the energy requirements are to generate the radio frequencies to start the process.

[MikeVic]

It does sound cool, but I wonder what the energy requirements are to generate the radio frequencies to start the process.

Yeah, or the actual frequencies used. Wouldn't want to disrupt the Pats.

[cartman]

Yeah, or the actual frequencies used. Wouldn't want to disrupt the Pats.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

[CraigSca]

I'm sure the by-products of the burning process probaby kill baby seals or something.

[Karlifornia]

I'm sure the by-products of the burning process probaby kill baby seals or something.

Well, baby seals aren't getting me to work every morning. Tough titties for them.

[Abe Sargent]

That's cool

[BrianD]

Well, baby seals aren't getting me to work every morning. Tough titties for them.

They could if you made slippers from their fur.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

PING: Al Gore

[Surtt]

This is a bunch of BS.

You use radio waves to breakup the water int hydrogen and oxygen and then let them burn.
Big deal, it is like pulling a spring and letting it snap back.
You will always need more energy to break the bond (due to losses) then you get back by reestablishing the bond.

[Brillig]

I'm scared that a "cancer researcher" is apparently unfamiliar with the Second Law of Thermodynamics...

[NoMyths]

There is no question that we will run out of fossil fuels. The best science I've seen is pointing to the fact that we're on the downslope in regards to oil, and not far off for coal (especially as oil goes, and China is primarily a coal nation). And when it tails off, and that will be within our lifetimes -- things are going to go quick.

The only solution is going to be found in generating enough energy to meet not only our current energy needs but our future needs adjusted for population growth. And we've got less than fifty years to find it, manufacture it, and implement it globally.

[Brillig]

There is no question that we will run out of fossil fuels. The best science I've seen is pointing to the fact that we're on the downslope in regards to oil, and not far off for coal (especially as oil goes, and China is primarily a coal nation). And when it tails off, and that will be within our lifetimes -- things are going to go quick.

The only solution is going to be found in generating enough energy to meet not only our current energy needs but our future needs adjusted for population growth. And we've got less than fifty years to find it, manufacture it, and implement it globally.

Uh. No. Current research suggests that we've got anywhere from 150-300 years of proven coal reserves. The key word being proven.

And what does this have to do with the latest 'cold fusion' fiasco? :D

[Surtt]

I'm scared that a "cancer researcher" is apparently unfamiliar with the Second Law of Thermodynamics...

1. You can't win
2. You can't break even.
3. You can't quit.

[NoMyths]

Uh. No. Current research suggests that we've got anywhere from 150-300 years of proven coal reserves. The key word being proven.

And what does this have to do with the latest 'cold fusion' fiasco? :D

That's all of the reserves though, Brillig. You've got to find it, use alternate methods to mine and process it, transport it -- you're still using a finite resource to fuel the extinction of that same resource. And we will be using more and more every year, especially as it replaces oil. Then the technologies that will have to change to run on alternate fuels, the implementation time and cost. Usually those studies are talking about current use -- not adjusting for population growth. It's a case of exponential growth against a finite resource.

Coal reserves = discovering ways of getting more out of less. Or in other words: just because it's theoretically there doesn't mean we can get it out.

[NoMyths]

That's all of the reserves though, Brillig. You've got to find it, use alternate methods to mine and process it, transport it -- you're still using a finite resource to fuel the extinction of that same resource. And we will be using more and more every year, especially as it replaces oil. Then the technologies that will have to change to run on alternate fuels, the implementation time and cost. Usually those studies are talking about current use -- not adjusting for population growth. It's a case of exponential growth against a finite resource.

Coal reserves = discovering ways of getting more out of less. Or in other words: just because it's theoretically there doesn't mean we can get it out.

And finally, 150 years will be within our grandchildren's lifetimes.

[Brillig]

Actually, 'proven reserves' pretty much means that they know it's there and can get it out. There's a whole lot of unproven reserves out there too.

Regarding population, current models suggest that world population will level off around nine billion, or only about 40% more than today. So that means 100-200 years of proven coal reserves.

Oil reserves are at about 40 years, excluding oil shale and oil sands, which could conceivably increase this by a factor of six.

I'm not contesting that these are finite resources that we need to use wisely, but your allegation that we've got "less than fifty years" is doomsaying of Al Gorish proportions.

Besides, running out of fossil fuels will help stop global warming.

[Mustang]

And finally, 150 years will be within our grandchildren's lifetimes.

I think you are a little off.

If my daughter has a child when she is 40, that means my grandchildren need to live to be 110...

[clintl]

Uh. No. Current research suggests that we've got anywhere from 150-300 years of proven coal reserves. The key word being proven.



And we'll be wise to use as little of it as possible.