Burning Salt Water for Fuel

[ZNFYRH]

http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_articl...?storyid=68227
WorldNetDaily: Can water fuel world?

Essentially, the guy can burn salt water.

That means the salt water can be used as a steam engine/turbine or even as a car engine.

[WindWip]

I'm skeptical of that. You can burn anything, but the determining factor is if you get more energy out of it than you put into it.

[ZNFYRH]

Some would tell you no.

Mathematically, you have two separate systems.

The first is:

Electricity => Radio Wave Generator => Boil Water => Steam

The second is:

Steam => Turbine => Electromagnet => Electricity

Different steam turbines produce different amounts of electricity based on different amounts of steam pressure. Steam pressure is based on the quantity of water being converted at any one time, which is dependent on the "burning" agent. The burning agent, in this case, depends on electricity.

Somewhere in there, from what these and other articles are saying, is the ability to produce more than is used.

The reason, in simple terms, is that heat can be added to a closed system. Thus the Law of Conservation can appear to be violated when sufficient amount of heat and work are involved.

[Praxius]

I thought of Sea water for something as well.... but then dropped the idea....

Salt water is just that... salty.... full of salt.... if you wanted to use it for a fuel or other resource, you will either need a very good filter or you will need something that won't carrode over time from the salt.

If you live in a snowy location in the winter time, you may have noticed how much the salt eats away at the metal on your car over the years from the roads..... I imagine a similar difficulty would lie in this.

[MachineCode0110]

2nd law of thermodynamics does not allow you to gain more energy from burning the fuel of a process that converts salt water into fuel than the energy required to run the process that convert salt water into fuel.

Sorry.

[ZNFYRH]

Actually, it does.

First of all, heat can be added to a closed system. That means that when the radio wave generators burn the water, they are adding heat to a system. Since that is the only form of energy that they contribute, then that is the "end" or "beginning" of the system, but it is not a loop. Not in the unified sense that would defy what is observed of conservation of energy.

Second, the 2nd "law" of thermodynamics is not "unbreakable." It's a statement based on repeated observations. Times are changing, and with new technologies and materials as well as a better understanding of the nature of energy entering and exiting systems, Conservation of Energy is not a rock solid as originally thought.

If by "Sorry" you mean that you are sorry that you didn't really do more than copy the relevant interpretation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics without actually demonstrating its pertinence to this topic, then I accept your apology.

[MachineCode0110]

The amount of energy that it takes to run the generators is greater than the total energy output of the burned fuel (not that you'll be able to harvest anywhere near 100% of it).


The enthalpy of the universe is negative, so please save it with the "better understanding of energy" kookery.

[ZNFYRH]

MachineCode

Okay then.

Since you're going to be snide with your "save it... kookery" comment...

First of all, you make a statement that requires factual support. What is the amount of energy required to run the radio wave generator? What are the numbers on the burn rate of the water and the steam produced? What are the numbers on the steam turbine generators used to produce electricity?

Before you tell me I'm wrong, provide some actual numbers.

Second... enthalpy is never a negative number.

function defined by the sum of internal energy of a system and product of its pressure by its volume

= internal energy + (pressure * volume)

That's the second time you've responded with what looks like a copy/paste from Wiki, and not actually elaborating.

[MachineCode0110]

Quote by: ZNFYRH What is the amount of energy required to run the radio wave generator?

Greater than the amount recoverable from burning the fuel.

What are the numbers on the steam turbine generators used to produce electricity?

Less than the amount needed to generate the fuel.


Guaranteed.

You'll never be able to come up with any equations or experiments that can show or prove otherwise.


It's not even worth your time to attempt it.

enthalpy is never a negative number.

I was wrong.

I meant to imply was that the change in enthalpy is negative.

The universe tends toward chaos as heat is lost in every reaction.

[ZNFYRH]

MachineCode

Your response is inadequate.

Show me the numbers.

I am requesting that you prove to me that his method fits the mold you are fitting it in. If you can't give me numbers, then you can't tell me what this process can and can't do.

[MachineCode0110]

I can tell you the upper bounds on any process that can ever be made.

[ZNFYRH]

Again, that's not what I'm asking.

For someone so quick to tell me matters of science I already know, you are equally quick to avoid answering the demand.

Since you say that this process cannot accomplish something, then give me the numbers.

[Praxius]

Well besides what I already said, the only other thing I know that would be a concern towards Salt water, is the salt build up over time.... including corrosion.

If you can solve those two problems in an effective manner then you're one closer step to making it a fuel.

[MachineCode0110]

Quote by: ZNFYRH give me the numbers.

I don't have to.


I get to be right without giving empirical evidence because it's proven a priori.

[ZNFYRH]

Quote by: MachineCode I don't have to. I get to be right without giving empirical evidence because it's proven a priori.

I'm not going to get into the whole "law" thing in another thread.

The reason you think you don't have to is because you can't.

Word to the wise... this is a debate forum. If you can't back up your words, admit it, but don't say you don't have to.

[MachineCode0110]

Prove to me that 1+1=2.

I want numbers.

[Vivid]

WindWip, MachineCode0110, ZNFYRH

Its not guaranteed that the salt water hydrogen fuel requires as much or more energy than it outputs. Heres why:

If you make a sound loud enough, you can probably rattle anything. However, if you use resonance you don't need much amplitude, just exactly the right frequency. If he can emit a frequency that causes the particles to wiggle enough, they may wiggle apart to the extent that they act with their elemental properties rather than the properties of their combined forms. Resonance is what heats up water in a microwave (which, incidentally, use less energy than burning fuel). Resonance is the way singers break wine glasses, or tuning forks activate other tuning forks that sound at the same frequency.

So he may not actually need much energy to send those particles flying apart.

Now I wonder if maybe he was resonating cancer cells, too.

[ZNFYRH]

Vivid

That's exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about.

The radio band of EM radiation isn't very large yet they can cause serious problems with the human body if you're standing in front of a generator.

[MachineCode0110]

Vivid,

all you're doing is attempting to imply that resonance alone can defeat conservation of energy law.


Simply, it's impossible.

Sorry.

[MachineCode0110]

Quote by: ZNFYRH The radio band of EM radiation isn't very large yet they can cause serious problems with the human body if you're standing in front of a generator.

Cancer doesn't require a large amount of energy to create.