Why is water not used as fuel?

[miketx]

There are no "laws" of thermodynamics.

 

[rupol2000]

It's not nonsense. It's reality.

Splitting H2O into H2 and O2 will be energy intensive.

Even if we assume that it is energy intensive, it still pays off by the fact that the combustion of hydrogen is free, and water does not require any investments for its production.

 

[rupol2000]

View attachment 647708

This is not laughter, this is the hysteria of an exposed reptilian who feels the approach of death

 

[miketx]

This is not laughter, this is the hysteria of an exposed reptilian who feels the approach of death

Insanity beckons you.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

There are no "laws" of thermodynamics. Thermodynamics does not take into account the energy that is transmitted through the waves. A thermos for tea with a mirror flask goes beyond the possibilities of thermodynamics, this is the "science" of charlatans written for cretins.

You have no clue what you are talking about. Sorry.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Even if we assume that it is energy intensive, it still pays off by the fact that the combustion of hydrogen is free, and water does not require any investments for its production.

It would be nice if you had even a nodding acquaintance with science here.

What do you mean by "intensive" energy? And how, exactly, do you think H2 comes off of H2O? (Hint: those bonds are not that easy to break.)

 

[rupol2000]

You have no clue what you are talking about. Sorry.

Yes, I am not initiated into the religion of the "new scholastic science", as an adept, left in the old-fashioned heresy of the scientific method without empty speculations. Sorry.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Yes, I am not initiated into the religion of the "new scholastic science", as an adept, left in the old-fashioned heresy of the scientific method without empty speculations. Sorry.

Are you using a Markov Chain text generator to create your posts?

 

[rupol2000]

It would be nice if you had even a nodding acquaintance with science here.

What do you mean by "intensive" energy? And how, exactly, do you think H2 comes off of H2O? (Hint: those bonds are not that easy to break.)

Stop your stupid church hymns, we are in the 21st century.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Stop your stupid church hymns, we are in the 21st century.

You aren't going to have much success when talking to people who survived P-Chem classes. Your rhetoric is that of the uninformed illiteratti.

Absolutely no one doubts you can get H2 from electrolytic dissociation of H2O. No one. The problem is around the energy it takes to get that H2 in the first place.

You are out of your depth and you don't have any technical expertise in this topic.

And posting a Russian-dubbed video isn't much of a help anyway.

 

[rupol2000]

Are you using a Markov Chain text generator to create your posts?

No, you just have an autistic mindset and you're bad at recognizing non-template texts. Guaranteed your IQ is < 90

 

[rupol2000]

Absolutely no one doubts you can get H2 from electrolytic dissociation of H2O

since 1800

No one. The problem is around the energy it takes to get that H2 in the first place.

alredy discussed

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

since 1800

alredy discussed

Yeah, you have no clue what you are talking about. You would have to have at least a basic chemistry class. But more likely some basic training in thermodynamics.

Look up bond enthalpies if you don't believe me.

 

[rupol2000]

Yeah, you have no clue what you are talking about. You would have to have at least a basic chemistry class. But more likely some basic training in thermodynamics.

How does thermodynamics explain the design of thermos for hot drinks? Why is there a mirror flask?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

How does thermodynamics explain the design of thermos for hot drinks? Why is there a mirror flask?

LOL.

FIrst off the most effective part of the thermos is the vacuum gap there around the liquid storage. This effectively stops transfer of heat via convection (hard to convect when there's not a lot of material to convect). Same with conduction.

The mirror aspect will reflect heat back into the system. Mirrors reflect LIGHT (that's how you use them when you look at yourself in a mirror) and IR is just another wavelength of light. That's the form of the heat coming off of hot liquids.

Not all physics is dominated by thermodynamics, sometimes there's radiation physics as well.

There is literally nothing "mysterious" about a thermos bottle. It follows all the laws of thermodynamics.

But let's bring the topic back to the idea of using water as a fuel. I will attempt YET AGAIN to explain why that won't work economically.

In order to burn H2 which you get from H2O is you have to electrolytically strip the H2 from the H2O. That requires ENERGY. You have to put in MORE energy to get the H2 than you will by burning the H2 for fuel (that's the second law of thermodynamics, you always lose some energy in these processes. No process is 100% perfectly efficient).

The reason HYDROCARBONS are a valuable fuel is because NATURE DID ALL THE ENERGY WORK. We didn't have to put much energy in to get that fuel. Nature created the hydrocarbons via photosynthesis (using energy from the sun) which were then killed and settled to an anoxic environment where they would be protected from oxidizing away to H2O and CO2. Bacteria then set about munching on the dead algae/bacterial material and as the material got buried deeper and deeper the heat (geothermal gradient) provided by the earth (due to the remnants of the accretionary phase of earth's formation as well as the radioactive materials in the rocks) and that heat and pressure (provided by the earth) produced oil and gas.

The oil and gas then migrated out of the "source rock" it formed in and moves to a RESERVOIR where it accumulates to a large enough degree that we can drill into it and pump it out. The only energy we put in at this point is removing the oil. Which will be less than the oil will produce when burned (otherwise it wouldn't be worth anything).

Does that make sense?

 

[rupol2000]

he mirror aspect will reflect heat

Waves, not heat.

Where is this described in thermodynamics?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Waves, not heat.

What do you think light is? What do you think heat is?

You are so out of your depth on this it's actually kind of hard to try to communicate anything to you.

Are you playing a "Poe" of some sort or are you really that uneducated in the sciences?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Water is quite simply decomposed into hydrogen and oxygen using electrolysis.

It is strange that so far this has not been introduced on an industrial scale as a source of fuel, it is almost free.

I think it's a reptiloid conspiracy.
Electrolysis can be created by burning the same hydrogen. It looks like a perpetual motion machine.

The combination of hydrogen and oxygen, when separate, contains energy. The process of combining them releases that energy, with water remaining as a by product.

The water does not contain the energy that the hydrogen and oxygen that make it up did, when they were separate.

To separate water back into hydrogen and oxygen, you have to put back that energy. Assuming 100% efficiency (which never happens in real life) you would have to put as much energy into water, to break it into hydrogen and oxygen, as what you would get by burning that hydrogen and oxygen, turning it back into water.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It only becomes worth it, if the heavy hydrogen is used to generate fusion power.

As far as I know, so far, Mankind has only been able top get fusion to happen in a manner that requires both deuterium (heavy hydrogen) and tritium (even heavier hydrogen).

Making fusion happen in a controlled manner is very difficult. Maintaining the conditions in which fusion can happen have, so far, required us to put more energy into it than we've been able to get back out.

The only way that we've been able to get more out of fusion than what we have to put into maintaining the conditions necessary ends up looking something like this:

 

[Bob Blaylock]

On May 2, 1800, Anthony Carlisle and William Nicholson decomposed water into hydrogen and oxygen using electric current.

220 years have passed since then and no one has even tried to do it on a large scale!!!!!

He had to put more energy into decomposing the water than he was able to get back by burning the hydrogen and oxygen.

That's a hard limit on the related physics. It will never be possible to decompose water into hydrogen and oxygen, and to get back more energy by burning the hydrogen and oxygen, than what had to be put into decomposing the water.