‘Travesty’
Gerald Witten. Retired ESU physical science professor, Emporia
Friday, February 20, 2009
SINCE WATER is H-2-0, two atoms of hydrogen, a fuel, and one atom of oxygen, an element necessary for combustion, it seems an excellent source of energy. The problem is that the energy already has been released, exothermic, when the molecule of water was formed.
To get the hydrogen fuel from the water molecule, energy must be added — endothermic. In the automobile (or pickup), the energy is in the fuel tank. Conceivably, this could fuel the engine which would turn the alternator which would generate electrical energy to break the water molecule into hydrogen and oxygen for eventual combustion.
So far, perpetual motion is a dream. You lose usable energy in such transformation. You use more extra fuel than you would ever get in the combustion of the hydrogen and oxygen. Friction is always a factor along with other heat losses. With no heat losses the best that you could ever do is break even. Energy is not created. The sun, our ultimate source of energy, turns matter into energy at the expense of the matter.
Even though the above ideas are usually taught in grade school (see E=mc 2), The Emporia Gazette devoted two thirds of the front page, one sixth of page 8, five photographs, four in color, to an article refuting the above scientific principles.
This travesty of news is bewildering. Who edits the material that is submitted for publication? The material “running with water” if printed should have run with the comics. Then, if read, it could have been used to wrap the garbage.
As a taxpayer and former teacher of 40 years, some questions come to mind about our Emporia education system along with The Gazette editorial staff.
Gerald Witten
Retired ESU physical science professor
Emporia
madpoet (anonymous) says...
I know people who have tried the "fuel cell" with water and wire etc. No one has had much luck with it. But you can get all sorts of instructions and testimonials on-line for it. It's a fad which will most likely die off soon. I've seen lots of articles in the Gazette that made me cringe, too. So you're not alone on that, Mr. Witten.
February 20, 2009 at 2:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
shoehorn (anonymous) says...
Thank-you. Regularly, I go around with some coworkers who bring this "source of energy" up for discussion. Mostly, they truly believe there is a mass conspiracy by (1) the auto manufacturers, (2) the big nasty oil companies, (3) the government to squelch the "technology" that will free us from dependency on oil. They don't seem interested in logic. Oh, well.
February 20, 2009 at 3:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
madpoet (anonymous) says...
I believe they could make more efficient combustion engines. It's sad that my husband's '86 Ford truck makes the same mpg as a new one. I don't buy that we've not made any advances with fuel injection and computers etc. I think the water cell is all hype. And the batteries for electric and hybrid cars take energy to make too.
February 20, 2009 at 3:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
Mr. Witten, I am an old college student of yours. I have questions about hydrogen as a fuel. My wife and I attended an old Neosho River School class quite a few years back where we made hydrogen using electricity and water. Of course it was quite simple. My questions have to do with the making of the hydrogen and the storage of it. It doesn't cost that much to make the hydrogen as I described it, does it? Is the problem the practibility of no storage cell (or tank) to hold the hydrogen in a vehicle? I read awhile back about a motorcycle that was supposed to be manufactured that would run off of a portable fuel cell (hydrogen storage).
February 20, 2009 at 5:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
momus (anonymous) says...
Most fuels have some sort of downside. We know that fossil fuels are finite in nature, so the real question here is: what do we use for fuel when the finite resources we are currently dependant on run out? Doesn't it make sense to at least explore alternative energy sources for the day when the status quo is no longer a viable option?
February 20, 2009 at 6:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Right on, momus, it makes perfect sense to explore alternative energy sources before we run out of the current one. However, fossil fuels have become like security blankets, and no one wants to let go. It's easier to sit there, stroke that blanket and suck a thumb rather than take on difficult research. The "what if I'm wrong" fear factor looms over research. I've been wondering what will happen if gasoline prices happen to decrease. I'm guessing that everyone will go right back to business as usual.
February 21, 2009 at 8:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
shoehorn (anonymous) says...
We have 300 years of coal reserves at the current rate of useage. Known oil reserves plus oil shale and tar sands on the North American continent are estimated to be between 2 and 3 times the reserves that the middle east are sitting on, and we are running out of fossil fuel? This sounds like the 95 year old man that recently froze to death because he didn't pay his utility bill. He left behind $600,000.00. Is this what we as a country are headed towards?
February 21, 2009 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
USNretired (anonymous) says...
Right on Doc. Well written and straight to the point. I never took any of your classes but I think I would have enjoyed them. On a different note completely, efficiency of energy conversion is always worse than laymen expect and, therefore, expectations of new methods may be too high. Gasoline as we know it was once a waste product until a use was devised for it. People should keep that in mind as well.
February 21, 2009 at 10:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
One alternative source of energy is wind power which many have argued against. I wasn't referring to just fuels, but to alternative energy sources in general.
February 21, 2009 at 6:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
momus (anonymous) says...
Observation,
I like the idea of using refrigerants, and I think this and other alternative energy sources need exploration if we are to break our dependence on foreign oil and prepare ourselves for the eventual exhaustion of fossil fuels. The tech trees for alternative fuel production, distribution and consumption are quite extensive, so putting off innovation needed to develop our alternative energy grid may mean that we are unprepared when conversion is no longer a luxury. Plus, we could develop a new industry made up of our citizens and create a new energy standard that wouldn't have the current political, economic, environmental and social drawbacks of our current energy dependence.
My favorite alternative energy source isn't a viable option in Kansas, but it is readily accessible in many parts of the country: geothermal. If I was running an oil rig in Wyoming, I would certainly look to expand my operation by tapping into the abundant geothermal energy available in that state, and send it south into an energy hungry Colorado.
No energy source is absolutely perfect, but historically this nation has done fantastic things when we encouraged innovation. Throughout all sectors, not just our energy grid, I feel like one problem this nation faces is that we have quit encouraging innovation. We have taken ideas of other generations and made them more convenient, or adapted them to newer technologies, but our idols now center more around pop stars, athletes and actors when we need rock stars of science, engineering and invention. Sorry about the rant, just needed to vent I guess...
February 22, 2009 at 10:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
momus (anonymous) says...
I used Wyoming as an example because they sit on top of one of the worlds largest super volcanos that could some day blow up and destroy most of the western US. Deflating some of that pressure while producing energy would (IMO) be a good thing. But you are right, their are unintended consiquences to most projects.
In regards to China and India, I tend to look at those two nations a little differently. As both of those nations rapidly increase their use of automobiles, more pressure is placed on a depleatable resource. I got a book from Town Crier a couple of years ago (sorry, the name escapes me at the moment) that essentially equated the shift in power from one civilazation to another with that civilizations dependance on and ability to adjust to fuel standards. Man power, horse power, wind, whale oil, coal, oil (what's next)... As resources were used up, emerging empires battled to control existing reserves (or thier tech). We see China already flexing muscle in Sudan and Iran. We risk becoming resource imperialists if we fail to identify and develop the next fuel standard. The developing world's increase in demand will more than compensate for our (hopefully) decreased need for foriegn produced fossil fuels, resulting in readily increasing prices for a steadily decreasing supply of fossil fuel.
If we develop our alternative standard, we can then export our tech and know how to the rest of the world. Wouldn't it be nice for other nations to trade deficit in relation to the US for a change? No nation will ride this energy wave perfectly, but I would rather us be on the front end of innovation rather than bring up the rear.
February 22, 2009 at 12:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
roger (anonymous) says...
Burning Hydrogen generated by our alternators on our cars will not make an appreciable effect because we cannot get something for nothing. This does not mean we cannot generate useful hydrogen with excess wind power. Wind is not a steady commodity but it sure would generate hydrogen which could be used to power internal combustion engines. The price of fossel fuels have dropped dramaticly killing the production of ethanol and further research for an alternative fuel supply. If we don't go ahead with the research and developement we leave our economy vulernable to the whims of fossil fuel producers like Chavez and Opec. Everyone says the recession/depression we are experiencing now was caused by housing but no one will convince me that $4.00 gasoline and overpriced diesel fuel didn't play a large part in the collapse. I think the ethanol plants and biodiesel plants should be built as insurance against $150.00 a barrel oil which will continue to suck the wealth from our economy. Solar energy electrical generation is not really viable now because the equipment is cost prohibitive. This does not mean that we can't build passive solar homes and businesses to use solar power to heat and cool and reduce conventional fuel consumption. The basic theory is simple and even cave men probably figured out that southern exposure and northern shielding is more efficient. My dog even knows that. Research should be ramped up to develope much cheaper solar electrical panels. Research should also be done to develope other sources of material for ethanol production or to make the process simpler and more efficient. If Corn is going to be used for ethanol production more utilization of the left over meal should be developed so the net gain is higher overall. After the alcohol is removed the byproduct will still make good feed sources for man and animal. The byproduct can be much further along in the production of food than just starting with raw corn thereby getting double usage from the corn.
February 22, 2009 at 5:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
roger (anonymous) says...
One question Observation, what oil company do you work for?
February 23, 2009 at 5:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
USNretired (anonymous) says...
You will never break even on "converting" energy from one type to another. Go ahead and try, freedom of choice and free will. Waste heat boilers can help conserve as can solar water heaters. Every little bit makes some difference, even if you don't find the mother lode.
February 23, 2009 at 6:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
LifeGoesOn (anonymous) says...
If we could only figure out how to get power out of a computer keyboard, people on the internet would hunt and peck us out of any energy shortage.
February 23, 2009 at 6:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )