Another sad article on our ocean's health...

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12915349#post12915349 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by burton14e7
Which numbers are out dated, links plz. I'm very interested as I ran it by somebody in the industry which I doubt any of us are. There's not much media that isn't going to be biased. I read that global media is ran by 7 conglomerates. I tend to read bbc news a lot too just because it's a non american view point but it's tends to be in line with cnn too. So it's not perfect but seems to be less biased.

Click your own link, the EIA study that they are citing was conducted in 2004!! Back then we didn't really have affordable technology to make shale usable, nor did we know the extent (we still don't fully) of what lies beneath ANWR, nor were we aware of what is off of our continental shelf. Did you know that China is about to begin drilling in Cuban waters 60 miles off of Florida? We can't drill there but we get to sit back and buy oil which will probably come from under us (they can drill sideways now). Keep in mind China has the LEAST concern for the environment of any industrialized nation. What exactly does your friend do in the industry? Not doubting you, but certainly him. If by USC you mean SoCal, that explains a lot, if you mean South Carolina, well I don't know crap about the Gamecock's business program. In no free economy in the world does an increase in supply with constant demand not equal a significant drop in price. We have waaaay more resources than we need to be energy independent, I think it is high time we get that way.

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12915425#post12915425 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by burton14e7
Nikola Tesla comes to mind when discussing alternative and possibly free energy we could have developed for...everything....that the government shut down.

Thank you!! Tesla was a freakin' genius! He got his funding yanked and his operation shut down because he figured out a way for people to all tap into energy that was already present and the powers-that-be wouldn't be able to profit. That was a culmination of American ingenuity (even though Tesla wasn't American born)!

 

[Tang Salad]

The problem with hydrogen is that it costs more energy to make it than you get from combusting it. It is only useful to store energy.

If we made hydrogen with nuclear power, then it would be an extremely clean and endless answer to the CO2 problem.

aslavatortin: How does that DIY reactor work?

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12915537#post12915537 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Tang Salad
The problem with hydrogen is that it costs more energy to make it than you get from combusting it. It is only useful to store energy.

If we made hydrogen with nuclear power, then it would be an extremely clean and endless answer to the CO2 problem.

aslavatortin: How does that DIY reactor work?

Your thoughts about hydrogen aren't necessarily true anymore. As for the reactor, I don't know how it works, I haven't had time to research it. I drive a company car so I can't do it to mine, but I do intend to do it to my wife's Jeep after I research it. Here are a couple of links: Waterpoweredcar.com and one for purchase

Here's some more info on hydrogen power

 

[Twz]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12915878#post12915878 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
Your thoughts about hydrogen aren't necessarily true anymore. As for the reactor, I don't know how it works, I haven't had time to research it. I drive a company car so I can't do it to mine, but I do intend to do it to my wife's Jeep after I research it. Here are a couple of links: Waterpoweredcar.com and one for purchase

Here's some more info on hydrogen power

Wife's jeep, dont like her much? :lol:

aslavatortin: How does that DIY reactor work?

I just read up a bit on it, was thinking about doing it to my car
but after seeing some of that stuff I'm not willing to strap that bomb to my car.
This reactor uses a set of electrodes (Placed very close together mind you, Im pretty sure the more surface area on the electrode the better the performance)
Which will go into the water with the addition of some other chemical and strips the Hydrogen molecule off the H20 particle and feeds that into you're intake...

Now I don't know if this is just me being paranoid but one of them electrodes arks and you're done.

 

[Tang Salad]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12915878#post12915878 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
Your thoughts about hydrogen aren't necessarily true anymore.

My "thoughts" on hydrogen have been true for many hundreds of years. It is simple Conservation of Energy. All of the following are known facts: free H does not exist on Earth. H must be made. To make/seperate H requires energy. The H can then be used as an energy source, for example to power cars. But energy will be lost to heat and sound, resulting in some of the energy entropying away.

It's definitely cleaner than gas in our cars though, but hydrogen doesn't just grow on trees.

 

[Twz]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916033#post12916033 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Tang Salad
My "thoughts" on hydrogen have been true for many hundreds of years. It is simple Conservation of Energy. All of the following are known facts: free H does not exist on Earth. H must be made. To make/seperate H requires energy. The H can then be used as an energy source, for example to power cars. But energy will be lost to heat and sound, resulting in some of the energy entropying away.

It's definitely cleaner than gas in our cars though, but hydrogen doesn't just grow on trees.

I'd better hope it dosnt
lightning hits one of them sucks you're going to have a nice boom. '

 

[Tang Salad]

And that's exactly why it doesn't. :lol:

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916033#post12916033 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Tang Salad
My "thoughts" on hydrogen have been true for many hundreds of years. It is simple Conservation of Energy. All of the following are known facts: free H does not exist on Earth. H must be made. To make/seperate H requires energy. The H can then be used as an energy source, for example to power cars. But energy will be lost to heat and sound, resulting in some of the energy entropying away.

It's definitely cleaner than gas in our cars though, but hydrogen doesn't just grow on trees.

That's all well and good, but if more energy is being expended creating it than is created by it combusting, then why does the addition of this reactor boost so many parameters of performance? Obviously, some of the energy is lost to heat and sound but it makes no sense to say it takes more energy to make it than it makes. Energy entropies when gas is combusted or when a match is struck, too, what does that have to do with anything? Separating the molecule is not as difficult as you are trying to make it sound; that is clear because if you were correct, these reactors wouldn't be of any benefit.

 

[Tang Salad]

I'm just guessing it doesn't. :lol:

 

[Twz]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916105#post12916105 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
That's all well and good, but if more energy is being expended creating it than is created by it combusting, then why does the addition of this reactor boost so many parameters of performance?

Huh?
It is taking electricity from you're car
you're car has a alternator in it acting as a sort of generator
keeping you're batterie charged..
so it's not really costing you anything to make the hydrogen

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916146#post12916146 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Twz
Huh?
It is taking electricity from you're car
you're car has a alternator in it acting as a sort of generator
keeping you're batterie charged..
so it's not really costing you anything to make the hydrogen

Exactly!

 

[Tang Salad]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916105#post12916105 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
Obviously, some of the energy is lost to heat and sound but it makes no sense to say it takes more energy to make it than it makes. /B]

But it's true. If you were right, then it would be possible to design a machine that once started could endlessly produce more and more Hydrogen all on its own forever and ever. Such a machine does not exist, and couldn't. It would be perpetul motion.

 

[Tang Salad]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916146#post12916146 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Twz
Huh?
It is taking electricity from you're car
you're car has a alternator in it acting as a sort of generator
keeping you're batterie charged..
so it's not really costing you anything to make the hydrogen

Ok ,Ok, point taken. But how many extra MPG do these claim? And do you need to replace the battery more often?

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916165#post12916165 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Tang Salad
But it's true. If you were right, then it would be possible to design a machine that once started could endlessly produce more and more Hydrogen all on its own forever and ever. Such a machine does not exist, and couldn't. It would be perpetul motion.

Ok, I see what you're saying...

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916178#post12916178 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Tang Salad
Ok ,Ok, point taken. But how many extra MPG do these claim? And do you need to replace the battery more often?

Dude, I don't know, I'm not selling the things, I just threw it out as an example of ingenious environmentally sound non-government-funded American brilliance:rollface:

 

[Twz]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916178#post12916178 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Tang Salad
Ok ,Ok, point taken. But how many extra MPG do these claim? And do you need to replace the battery more often?

Well the site i was reading off says "f the average car today gets 20 MPG, imagine 100 MPG! that means the Oil Corps would lose 80%"
So i would think about 5x more then what you would now,
i think there are too many variables with you're vehicle to give a sure millage improvment.

But with the batterie I'm sure it would diminish it faster if you turn this reactor on to start the car but the alternator runs most every thing in a car after it is started,
the main use of the batterie is to start the car.

 

[aslavatortin]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916224#post12916224 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Twz
Well the site i was reading off says "f the average car today gets 20 MPG, imagine 100 MPG! that means the Oil Corps would lose 80%"
So i would think about 5x more then what you would now,
i think there are too many variables with you're vehicle to give a sure millage improvment.

But with the batterie I'm sure it would diminish it faster if you turn this reactor on to start the car but the alternator runs most every thing in a car after it is started,
the main use of the batterie is to start the car.

One of the sites selling them that I just looked at offers a sort-of guarantee that it will improve MPGs by 50%. If it doesn't, they give you the unit and installation for free, but if it does you pay them $2000 ON TOP OF the price of the unit and installation!

 

[Twz]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12916251#post12916251 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by aslavatortin
One of the sites selling them that I just looked at offers a sort-of guarantee that it will improve MPGs by 50%. If it doesn't, they give you the unit and installation for free, but if it does you pay them $2000 ON TOP OF the price of the unit and installation!

Wow, Thats quite a guarantee, and thats quite a price,
i bet if you just unhooked a O2 sensor for a bit and showed them it
with the reduced performance from the engine they would give it to you for free?
Then simply hook the O2 sensor back up? :lol:

 

[iceemn360]

"Jeremy Jackson has coined the term, slippery slope to slime,"

Wow thats my professor!