New fuel in Salt water that burns

STR

STR

Knifemaker/Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2004
Messages
12,955
Has anyone else seen the video of the guy that was trying to find a cure for cancer and instead found a way to make salt water burn? I just watched it and have to say its amazing. Wonder how long it will take GM to buy up the rights to this one to shut it down? Some guy by the name of Jon Kanzieus or Kanzius, not sure (pronounced Kansas) came up with it. You can find a bunch of links to it by using google and typing in Jon Kansius and salt water fuel. I've watched at least four maybe more news casts of this now.

Anyway, I think its really mind boggling to watch a vile of nothing but tap water and morton salt with a paper towel stuffed in it for a wick burn to a 3000` F flame. I sure could use that free fire under my old metal can heat stove in my shop in the winter. That would beat the heck out of burning propane the way I do. Imagine the implications for new hybrid cars, boats, turbines. Just about anything really that requires fuel. My only question is how much energy is needed in the way of radio waves to ignite it? No one mentions that.

It will be interesting to see if more research goes forward with this one.

STR
 
Yep, the same thought crossed my mind. I know this will threaten a lot of those in the fuel industry. But you know with gas reaching upwards of $3 a gallon and predictions of it being $4 or more soon I think its high time.

I guess we better stock up on salt now before the tariffs begin to escalate.

STR
 
id bet anything that they already have and engine out there that is easily capable of 100+miles to the gallon, but theyre never going to release it
 
I'm sure it takes a pretty huge amount of electricity to get the hydrogen out of salt water compared to the amount of energy released upon burning it. It seems to me that it would be less efficient than hydrogen separation via electrolysis, which has been proven to be unsuitable for long-term power. Basically, the flame produced would have to be hot enough to power the engine that drives the vehicle and also have some energy left over to produce the radio waves that release the hydrogen from salt water. Also, when you burn hydrogen in air, the biproduct is (drumroll) H2o! If you routed the exhaust back into the fuel tank, you'd get perpetual motion. From what I understand, a vehicle that used radio waves to separate hydrogen from saltwater as a source of fuel would have to use the energy burned to power both the vehicle's locomotion and the means by which the radio waves are produced. Somewhere in there, I think there's a violation of the first law of thermodynamics...

Don't worry conspiracy theorists, this idea isn't THAT new and this guy is probably safe.
 
That cracks me up! Don't we all know he has to be using more energy to split the water into hydrogen & oxygen than he gets back by recombining them? I guess some people don't.... :)
 
Blais said:
I'm sure it takes a pretty huge amount of electricity to get the hydrogen out of salt water compared to the amount of energy released upon burning it. It seems to me that it would be less efficient than hydrogen separation via electrolysis, which has been proven to be unsuitable for long-term power. Basically, the flame produced would have to be hot enough to power the engine that drives the vehicle and also have some energy left over to produce the radio waves that release the hydrogen from salt water. Also, when you burn hydrogen in air, the biproduct is (drumroll) H2o! If you routed the exhaust back into the fuel tank, you'd get perpetual motion. From what I understand, a vehicle that used radio waves to separate hydrogen from saltwater as a source of fuel would have to use the energy burned to power both the vehicle's locomotion and the means by which the radio waves are produced. Somewhere in there, I think there's a violation of the first law of thermodynamics...

Don't worry conspiracy theorists, this idea isn't THAT new and this guy is probably safe.
Click to expand...


You are correct about the law of thermodynamics. With each energy conversion from one form to another, some of the energy becomes unavailable for further use so 100% efficiency is not happening. To my knowledge its impossible to create as much or more energy than you use so there will be no need for any perpetual motion fears or fantastic tales regarding it.

I don't know about the conspiracy theory comment. I can think of times in my lifetime when it was very much reality and not conspiracy when new machines were bought up lock stock and barrel only to be closed away forever and other times when smear campaigns were implemented against otherwise good ideas to shut them down when they threatened one of the bigger guys on the block. Remember the Wankel engine and how GM was all gung ho for it? Well, that is until they found out they weren't getting exclusive rights to it to use in their Corvettes afterall. Then an all out attack ensued to smear it to near oblivion.

STR
 
Cougar Allen said:
That cracks me up! Don't we all know he has to be using more energy to split the water into hydrogen & oxygen than he gets back by recombining them? I guess some people don't.... :)
Click to expand...

I don't know about that at all. His first experiments were using pie plate antenna to generate radio waves in his kitchen. So how much energy did he need? They don't talk about that. It may be that a battery can generate the radio waves for all I know. And if an engine could be made to run from the flame, maybe that engine could then keep the battery charged in some DC or AC current set up like we use in our cars now. I can't say without hearing more on it.

STR
 
STR said:
I don't know about that ...
Click to expand...

That would be because you're not familiar with the first three laws of thermodynamics. There are different ways of phrasing them; one way is:

1. You can't win.
2. You can't break even.
3. You can't get out of the game.
 
I know a little about it my friend. I wrote part of the first law and second in a post above but thats fine. I don't want to argue about it. The jury is still out on what it can be used for. Obviously some engineering labs and other scientists are interested in looking into it further from the sounds of it. They said the Wright brothers should give up and can't win also as I recall.

I've never viewed the laws as absolute. I know many do but when you look at some of the conclusions its akin to some nonsense according to many. I mean many scientists completely ignore it with their theories, but of course few get off the ground. One of the laws states that energy cannot be created but simply converted from one form to another leading into matter that cannot be created and yet matter exists all around us proving it came from somewhere right?

STR
 
I tole Wilbur and I tole Orville and now I'm tellin you -- if God had meant us to fly he would have given us the intelligence to build airplanes!
 
STR said:
Yep, the same thought crossed my mind. I know this will threaten a lot of those in the fuel industry. But you know with gas reaching upwards of $3 a gallon and predictions of it being $4 or more soon I think its high time.

I guess we better stock up on salt now before the tariffs begin to escalate.

STR
Click to expand...

You couldnt use sea water?
 
Sure. They did that also. I got excited seeing this because I figure that if I could get a flame to heat up my stove can in the shop using salt water and all I needed to do to get that flame was plug a radio into a 110 socket in the wall to create radio waves that it would probably be cheaper than buying propane. If the guy did the first experiments in his own kitchen it seems to me to indicate that 110V is all thats needed but I could be wrong. Some of the bigger xray machines I sold to dentists were 220V but they were always either 110 or 220 and some were capable of being converted to either or.

STR
 
Everytime gas gets a little high, some guy figures out a way to fuel a car from water. :yawn:

And, everytime, GM assassinates him. :rolleyes:
 
Well, of course gas has to be high, otherwise it's not economically viable to run a car off of water. Just today I stopped by the gas station and gas was $1.06 a liter, whereas water was $1.75. Gas would have to go up by .69 a liter for it to be even.


DO I have to think of EVERYTHING around this place??!?!
 
sixstrings101 said:
id bet anything that they already have and engine out there that is easily capable of 100+miles to the gallon, but theyre never going to release it
Click to expand...

You'd lose everything you have - if you did. Hell even the hybrids aren't worth anything for fuel economy.
 
When I was a young lad, long ago and far away, my dad installed a device in his car that converted water to hydrogen and oxygen. The gases were fed into the carburetor and it was supposed to improve mileage and power. Electricity from the coil was routed to the electrodes in a glass jar. It made lots of bubbles, but didn’t do anything else.

By the way, regular at the Texaco station where I worked after school was 17.9 cents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top