Man claimed to build a motorbike that can run on hydrogen taken from water. I'm not much of a chemfag or anything, but I just want to know if this is possible since no one is sure if it's a hoax. I already know they've pulled of algea as a fuel.
http://www.odditycentral.com/auto/brazilian-man-builds-clean-motorcycle-that-can-travel-300-miles-on-a-liter-of-water.html
>>7998478
Overunity device. If anything, the guy managed to make an electric bike using electrolisis as a intemediate step. Probably even less efficient than normal motors.
Shut it down.
>electrolysis
>runs on water
>>7998483
>not knowing hydrogen battery has been out for dozen of years
>not knowing that every oil multinational owns the rights and patents for hydrogen based car, just refusing to use them because they'd lost too many money
Of course this is not an hoax boys, he'll just be silenced and forced to destroy his prototype like the others
Just skimmed over the article, but he is investing energy to break down water then combining it again to get the energy back? Or am I retarded
>>7998526
Yeah, 1 liter of water which is lysed into hydrogen and oxygen and burned... and then about 30 liters of petrol.
>>7998526
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_splitting#Chemical_production
"A variety of materials react with water or acids to release hydrogen. Such methods are non-sustainable."
The articles state that the man uses an "additive" in the water to make his engine run. Probably some aluminum oxidizing agent. The additives would cost much more than gas, be much more toxic to produce, and are definitely non-sustainable.
>>7998533
Nonsense, the only 'additive' needed is a small amount of NaCl.
>>7998483
>probably less efficient
it is by definition less efficient. come on, faggot, this is basic thermodynamics.
>>7998478
OP, it costs more energy to split the water than you can recover as useful work by recombining (burning) the products. That extra energy has to come from somewhere, in his case he is just wasting gasoline. In an optimal case, we would capture solar energy and provide hydrogen or hydrates at fuel stations. That is the basis of a hydrogen economy, and no, we are not there yet.
>>7998576
>hurrr muh resonance
its like you dont even know what that word means, and have jumped on the bull shit train because you think it sounds like a reasonable explanation.
Even lasers, which are perfect quantum oscillation systems, require a fucking energy source to pump them. In this case, you would need 50,000 photon interactions to get the energy to break that bond, which is an absolutely absurd number given that ANY molecular system is going to fucking thermally relax before you ever get up to that number, unless your photon flux is so goddamn high you might as well just admit you are using a megawatt laserbeam to power your fucking motorcycle.
>>7998576
>small amount of NaCl, + photons
Truly it is amazing that the world's oceans haven't evaporated into clouds of molecular oxygen and hydrogen, now isn't it?
>>7998488
nice meme
>>7998526
As >>7998533 said, maybe they are using water splitting. More probably then just made a retarded battery-bubbler-engine setup. Kinda like using a dynamo in a running electric motor to charge the battery.
>>7998602
You didnt read what I wrote. I'm comparing an electric motor and an indirect process using hydrogen as a intermediate step. Not necesarilly less efficient (although probably so).
Or are electric motors necesarilly as powerful as gas engines? Did you took into consideration that problem?
>>7998478
Gypsy detected. Go ahead, buy his hydrogen motorbike that runs on water!
>>7998478
>The T Power H2O motorcycle incorporates an external car battery that produces electricity and separates hydrogen from water molecules. This results in combustion, releasing energy that fuels the bike.
So it's actually just world's least efficient electric motor. That's even dumber than it initially sounds.
Where the fuck do these twits come from, and why do idiots keep encouraging them. There's a big difference between "thinking outside the box" and just not having a clue what you're doing.
>>7998670
You didnt read what I wrote. I'm comparing an electric motor and an indirect process using hydrogen as a intermediate step. Not necesarilly less efficient (although probably so).
No, I understood exactly what you meant, and you are wrong. Its not "probably" less efficient, and it is certainly not "not necessarily less" efficient. It IS less efficient, by basic laws of thermodynamics.
If you cant fucking remember, understand, and apply three simple laws that are the fundament of almost all of physics, then you need to shut the fuck up and study some more.
>>7998773
It's the green energy revolution, people are desperate to find a feasible replacement to fossil fuels and are failing hard. People confuse batteries or technology for energy sources when they are energy sinks.
Simple fact of the matter is there are not enough fossil fuels left to rebuild civilizations fossil fuel infrastructure and any attempt to do so accelerates the inevitable collapse of civilization built on fossil fuels. There appears to be no replacement for them but it won't stop people from pretending there is.
>>7998826
>It's the green energy revolution, people are desperate to find a feasible replacement to fossil fuels and are failing hard.
I'm not really sure if that's the primary motivation here. I suspect it's more motivated by the cost of the fuel, or just a plain old scam.
>Simple fact of the matter is there are not enough fossil fuels left to rebuild civilizations fossil fuel infrastructure and any attempt to do so accelerates the inevitable collapse of civilization built on fossil fuels.
What?
Where the hell are you getting that from?
>>7998478
It's true, but horribly inefficient and misguided. He's electrolyzing the water into hydrogen and oxygen, then burning the hydrogen in the bike's combustion engine.
Useful if you have shitloads of electricity and no electric motors, but akin to rolling a dildo in glitter if you do. It would be much more efficient to just power an electric motor with the battery.
LOL AYOOO
I can fix global warming no prob. you retards keep thinking hydrocarbons are your enemy. they aren't.
We can just pull CO2 out of the ocean with solar, and convert it directly to methane. you'd only need 20 GW globally to reclaim all the carbon that humans put out. we can slap together 20 gigs of solar at the equator ezpz. cost less than an aircraft carrier.
>>8000505
>We can just pull CO2 out of the ocean with solar, and convert it directly to methane. you'd only need 20 GW globally to reclaim all the carbon that humans put out.
Considering that we produced a LOT more than 20GW of electricity while emitting all that CO2, I am incredibly sceptical.
