Custom_truker, your professor was correct.
The enzymes dramatically speed up the processes, and you can break down matter in different ways using different enzymes to produce different substances. The speeding up of the process it what is key: you are simply augmenting enzymes that are already present in the matter, to accelerate the metabolization process, and to customize it.
Is it practical? I dunno, never tried it...
BDV

 

Interesting, I guess we could make a BBQ from a nuclear reactor if we wanted to, doesn't mean it's feasible. They never mention the source or cost of their H or the other precious metals (platinum and silver) they use to make their burner. Nor is there any evidence of the long term practicality of it.

What I found most interesting, was the production of NOx
It's NOx, not CO2, that is the source of the air pollution in our cities, and has the largest negative impact on our atmosphere and environment.

I didn't know that the burning of H produced NOx, let alone such large amounts of NOx, now that I do, I'm even more against H as an alternative fuel. The emissions from fossil fuel combustion, when combined with modern catalytic converters, is in theory CO2 and H2O. The problem is no combustion is complete, you get NOx, radical hydrocarbons, CO, etc... Obvioulsy H combustion faces the same problems.

Quote:

Gee, look at all the money we've spent and are going to spend.

http://www.hfcletter.com/letter/March03/features.html

We need to research alternatives. I don't necessarily agree with how this money is being spent, but just the fact yhat it is is a good thing.

Also, these dollar amounts are peanuts compared to what the oil industry spends on R & D to increase efficiency and reduce emissions. (and yes, profits, but in the end, we all win)

Quote:

Hey, maybe the Hindenburg didn't blow because of Hydrogen.

http://www.hydrogenus.com/advocate/ad22zepp.htm

I'm skeptical of an article written and funded by the National Hydrogen Association, but I don't doubt there is some truth to the story. However, I don't believe that a volume of extremely flammable H gas such as was on the Hindenburg played no role in the fire. I think to do so would be naive.

Quote:

Wow, you want that electric car of yours to beat that Mustang off the line?

http://www.maxwell.com/ultracapacitors/

Interesting, but it doesn't change the base arguments against electricity. Also, capacitors can only store energy, not create it, and they can supply that power for relatively short periods of time. Their use could definately improve the performance of electrical vehicles though.

Good stuff.

Waxy

 

interesting... if you go to chevron's website and look at performix diesel... it has water in it!

 

This is a very interesting thread. I am far from expert on the subject, but thought I would like to throw something in as food for thought.

After watching Minority Report, I put the second DVD in (the one with "how we made the movie", etc...).

In the documentary DVD, they stated how they used experts in different scientific fields to help explain how things would/could be done in 50 years.

First of all, I know it was just a movie, but it brings to mind some interesting possibilities.

Every post I have read so far seems to point to the vehicle as the source for power. What if the source were magnetism from electro magnets running under the streets. Electric motors run by magnetizing coils in the stator (or part of the motor that doesn't turn), and depending on the type of motor (Shaded Pole, CSR, CSIR, etc...) the coils on the arbor are attracted and repelled to keep the motor running while electricity is applied. If our power lines were run under ground around these steel cores, creating extremely long electro magnets, the magnetic energy could be used to power vehicles at a minimal loss of electricty. The lines could be tapped and split off to residential areas, businesses etc... to provide electricity to the structures.

Obviously, it would not end the need for gas and diesel powered vehicles, as those in rural areas would not benefit from it. However, a system like this would reduce the number of gas and diesel engines on the road at any given point in time significantly.

It just seems to me that you have to first determine how you are going to make something run, then work on how you are going to refine it, or let someone else determine that part, as you are now rich from your initial idea.

I guess all I'm really saying is that if the source were external and harnessed, it may prove beneficial without having to eliminate vehicles (or the types of vehicles) we currently have. I for one would hate to see the end of gas or diesel powered engines completely, which is something that I really don't think I will see in my lifetime... the complete elimination of them, that is.

As I said, I don't have any real answers (or any true insight for that matter) on the subject, just something to think about.

That's my $.02

Steve

 

OK, I am going to try to keep this somewhat short.
2K1F150--You do realize that those coils are made of copper? Very thin, fragile, very corrodable (right word?) copper. You do not have enough copper, or the money for that amount of copper that would be needed. secondly, the coils would not last that long to to the amount of current. Thirdly copper corrodes, look at the statue of liberty!, And corroded copper does not conduct., and it breaks very easily.

Everyone else. as far as I see it, the only reasonable fuel for the time being and possible for a VERY long while will be oil. The closest possible alternative is probably Ethanol alchohol. It is cleaner, more powerful, cheaper, and replenishable (right words again?) Problems are that you cannot produce it fast enough, we alone use more than you could produce. However, if we could get to a point of being able to produce that mmuch...All you farmers could start making the money you deserve for you long and hard days. Secondly, The vast majority of vehicles would have to be converted (Fuel lines, gas tanks, gaskets, exhaust, intake, carbs/throttle bodies, injectors.) Good thing is that vehicles such as my car (yes I own a car [a '71 stang]) but my vehicle I am replacing the whole system anyways, if ethanol was readily available here, I could swap it over no problem, and get better milage, cheaper gas, and alot better power.
Just my thoughts.

 

Of course, you are right, and I know this. It would not really be feasible based on the amount of copper alone (not to mention the other issues you brought up).

I really have nothing else to add, except, I was really just thinking along the lines of external power, but at this point it really doesn't make sense for passenger vehicles... don't know that it ever will.


Steve

 

A magnetic field is created ANY time current flows though a conductor. It doesn't matter if it's straight or coiled. Search, "Left Hand Rule."

Cool idea.

Oh yea, coppers pretty cheap right now.

 

Thanks!



Steve

 

I did not read all the posts...so if this is a repeat I apologize. Hydrogen powered cars are on the road in CA.

Honda has a hydrogen powered car which it recently sold to the city of Los Angeles.
http://greennature.com/article2003.html

BMV has an internal combustion hydrogen powered car
http://www.edmunds.com/news/innovati...6/article.html
I did'nt pull up the latest info on subject...but last I heard BMW was working on fill station logistics and had a goal of having at least one hydrogen fill station in each major city in Europe by 2005. BMW's hydrogen motor will run on gas as well.

blu