G
Greegor
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
G > What made you choose water?
MAT > He's all wet. ;-)
Even if it had mineral oil dialectric it's not much plate area.
John Larkin > I think it's one of those fringey free-energy hydrogen
generators.
I don't think stainless fits that idea.
And they usually get both hydrogen and oxygen though
they could intend to throw away (vent) the oxygen.
I always thought it was neat how you can take water
and break it into hydrogen and oxygen but then
if you combine those two gases and ignite they
can be quite energetic.
Is the energy from that process worth the cost
of the electricity used to break up the hydrogen
and the oxygen?
I took it for granted that it was a lossy energy conversion.
When they reconsidered this stuff for automobile use,
what exactly killed that idea off?
The explosive hazard? Conversion costs? What else?
MAT > He's all wet. ;-)
Even if it had mineral oil dialectric it's not much plate area.
John Larkin > I think it's one of those fringey free-energy hydrogen
generators.
I don't think stainless fits that idea.
And they usually get both hydrogen and oxygen though
they could intend to throw away (vent) the oxygen.
I always thought it was neat how you can take water
and break it into hydrogen and oxygen but then
if you combine those two gases and ignite they
can be quite energetic.
Is the energy from that process worth the cost
of the electricity used to break up the hydrogen
and the oxygen?
I took it for granted that it was a lossy energy conversion.
When they reconsidered this stuff for automobile use,
what exactly killed that idea off?
The explosive hazard? Conversion costs? What else?