Radio Frequencies Help Burn Salt Water?

Question

John Kanzius happened upon the discovery accidentally when he tried to desalinate seawater with a radio-frequency generator he developed to treat cancer. He discovered that as long as the salt water was exposed to the radio frequencies, it would burn.

The discovery has scientists excited by the prospect of using salt water, the most abundant resource on earth, as a fuel.


What are your thoughts about this discovery?


http://green.yahoo.com/index.php?q=node/1570

Answer 1

My first thought is: how much RF energy do you need? And how much energy do you get back?

Answer 2

Basic laws of physics and chemistry prevent this from working. Follow the cycle:

Energy in --> radio waves ---> water ---> hydrogen/oxgyen ---> water + energy out

Energy out cannot exceed energy in. The water is already "burned". Going from water --> hydrogen/oxygen and then back to water CANNOT have a net energy output, and will certainly come up short to at least some extent.

This kind of "water fuelled" whatever has been around for at least 30 years and also proves to be an impossible perpetual motion machine. Anything that runs on this effectively runs on the electricity which makes the radio waves.

Sorry. There is no such thing as "free" energy. It always must come from a potential.

Answer 3

This discovery is very significant. Will it be a source of free and clean energy where energy out is greater than energy in? Most probably not. But what is most promising is that the fuel is basically as free as the air we breathe. It's portable, and both easily and safely stored. The reaction is controlable with high output and the technology is simple and inexpensive. And it is clean-burning.
Oil, natural gas and coal are all limited, non-renewable resources. We have to spend alot of money to find where these fuels are, extract them, refine them, transport them and store them. We already know where the seawater is and unlike oil, we don't need to do any kind of refining to make it usable. Once it is burned we get the water back.
If they can apply this process to the transportation industry it will be a huge thing. Maybe we'll fight a few less wars.

Answer 4

I agree with John D.

I am wondering why most of the people seems to talk about "Energy in, Energy out" thing.

The news report itself is nothing to do with the creation of energy.

The real point is that you have alternative method to produce hydrogen apart from electrolysis method.

Please keep in mind that we can get electricity from solar power, wind power or hydropower stations. But we still do not have a good (battery) technology to store this electrical power to drive cars before recharging again.

On the contrary, hydrogen is portable and reusable energy. It the fuel of th future.

In the experiment, you just saw a small flame coming out ot the salt water test tube. But you must remember that the equipment itself was not intended to produce hydrogen. If modified properly (so that the radio wave will intercept more volume of salt water), more hydrogen could be extracted.

Therefore, I would like to say that the discovery is plausible. I congratulate to Joh Kanzius as well as the news agencies who report this. Thank you.

Answer 5

I think the article is way overstated.

Salt water has a very low energy content. There's no magic way to make it burn. If it does so it's because they're putting a lot of energy in with the radio frequencies and splitting the water into hydrogen and oxygen. Ordinary electrolysis does the same thing. You have to put more energy in than you get back.

Here's somebody else claiming much the same thing:

http://www.rexresearch.com/klein/klein1.htm

"It seems like every 15 years or so some guy comes along and claims to have come up with a way to turn water into clean burning fuel."

This is not a magic way to make energy.

Answer 6

I have used DC electricity to split hydrogen from salt water. It is a trivial thing. You do not need radio frequencies. But the amount of energy it takes (either in radio frequency or DC electricity) is more than you can generate by burning the hydrogen produced. In other words, you get more useful work by just using the electricity to run an electric motor. Everybody should know this simple fact. But clearly they don't. At least David Templeton of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (who wrote the linked story) doesn't seem to know it.

Answer 7

Just another way to disassociate water into hydrogen and oxygen and then burn the hydrogen. It may be more energy efficient than electrolisys or steam reforming of hydrocarbons, but the second law of thermodynamics still mandates that the net energy input required will be greater than the energy released by the combustion of hydrogen.

Answer 8

Bunkum.
Irving Langmuir invented the atomic hydrogen welding torch almost 100 years ago, and it's based on the same principle. It's easy to split water into its constituents by electrolysis (DC or RF), BUT you don't get out more energy than you put in. Must have been a slow news day for this story to be published.
TANSTAAFL. (R. Heinlein)

Answer 9

I had the same thought as Keith. I highly doubt that you can get more energy from burning the hydrogen than you have to put into the frequency generator.

Answer 10

i think it's an amazing discovery, but if i recall from reading hte article yesterday, it does not tell how much energy we can produce. my guess is not a lot. hopefully in the future we will find a way to make salt water an efficient fuel source.

Answer 11

Now I understand why UFO ships like to dive into the ocean of Puerto Rico or take sea water like some witnesses said.