On Feb 8, 9:33 pm, "gb6...@yahoo.com" <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Feb 8, 9:28 pm, "gb6...@yahoo.com" <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Feb 8, 5:39 pm, "gb6...@yahoo.com" <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Feb 8, 4:01 pm, "gb6...@yahoo.com" <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Feb 8, 3:37 pm, "gb6...@yahoo.com" <gb6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Air to water system, 24 liters per day with little
electricity. (1 liter per hour at 30% air humidity).
http://www.airtoh2o.com.au/design.asp
For this model, aa gas tank needs to be filled up
with water, generally a full gas tank (60 liters of gas)
runs a car for a week, so something like this can
slowly fill the tank, and try to keep it filled with water.
An open mind helps.
Now the second thing a car needs to do, is using
a high-energy hydrogen combustion engine, the
car needs to extract hydrogen from the water at
an electric (electrolysis) rate which provides sufficient
hydrogen gas (not liquid) to the engine.
Why am I convinced that the hydrogen combustion
engine (hp) is stronger in terms of energy than the energy
needed to extract hydrogen from water?
Ordinary experience of modern technologies, a
combustion engine is three times more powerful
than an electric engine based on ordinary experience.
The energy needed in producing hydrogen in a fuel
cell battery re-produces 60 percent of the energy.
Storing hydrogen for electric fuel cell (as battery
technology) uses a 5-times larger gas tank than
babababababababababa... your mother's car's
oil tank.
Because the explosive power of hydrogen running
in a combustion engine cannot be compared to
the electric or chemical processes used in hydrogen
fuel-cell technologies, the problem to global warming is
solved as hydrogen can be used with existing car
engines.
Switching to free energy hydrogen taken from the
air needs simple and cheap devices and existing
architectures.
It is your duty to fascist me away forever and vote
for Bush.
Full project, with your respect toward your love to Bush:
http://www.geocities.com/gmbajszar/free_energy.htm
The electrical equivalent of one horsepower is 746 watts.
The air to water system above uses 400 watts for generating
water out of the air.
15.5-16.5 Kwatt-hours of energy are needed to convert 1
gallon of water to hydrogen. (why do they use gallons?)
I think it means that in an hour, if one starts with 5 gallons of
water, when there is four gallons of water left, in that hour
16500 watts of energy were used at a constant rate,
meaning to disolve one gallon of water in an hour and get
hydrogen, one needs 25 or so horsepowers.
Unfortunately I did the calculations, and this hydrogen
gas can only produce about 20 horsepowers for an hour
in a hydrogen-injection system (with 50 percent engine
efficiency). So I was right that there is space.
The explosive energy of hydrogen gas is stronger than
the electric processes.
Because the electric processes are battery stuff,
and the exploding hydrogen gas is a different stuff.
Though both create motion as energy, one is like
a battery charge, the other like gas exploding and
running a combustion engine from a different kind
of energy, like an atom bomb cannot be compared
with a different kind of energy. It has a different energy.
A rod of plutonium can run all the energy needs of
a military submarine for 4 years. It is different,
burning hydrogen gas or using hydrogen as a battery
that is set to work when mixing with oxygen in the
air is different. It is not the same thing, and I see things.
