Replies to post #52220 on Biotech Values

[OakesCS]

OT Re: burning water

Preciouslife1,
If those quotes from Roy are accurate, I'm surprised because I would've expected less showmanship and more substance. I also suspect that any proposal by Roy to DOE will be an extension of Ulrich Franck's supercritical water oxidation work rather than as a means of generating hydrogen for fuel. The radio frequency generator adds an efficiency loss (direct electrolysis would be more efficient); however, it's conceivable that the process might have useful applications in areas such as waste treatment.
Charlie

[iwfal]

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

...

The scientists want to find out whether the energy output from the burning hydrogen — which reached a heat of more than 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit — would be enough to power a car or other heavy machinery.

This is story that makes no sense from physics 101 sense. This is an amusing experiment - but clearly the water is not fuel.

The whole point of "fuel" is to store energy in a convenient form (for storage and subsequent liberation). Per their own description the energy here comes from the burning hydrogen - and the energy to liberate the hydrogen from the oxygen almost certainly comes from the rf energy (there is no mention of strange byproducts indicating some kind of salt reaction or other energy sources). And the energy for the rf comes from ... . Not the water, obviously (see Perpetual Motion - Impossibility Of).

So the water isn't fuel.

BTW - Some others have suggested applications for this technique. Maybe valid (but not my domain). But fuel is pretty unlikely.