New Reactor Verified To Produce Enormous Amounts of Hydrogen At Virtually No Cost

a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

You can buy a 2% air hydrogen mixture, from Praxair, a single compressed gas cylinder that contains 146 cubit feet of gas. Pretty easy to conceal that and would account for small size, large mass.


MysterX From most people who make these statements about the consiquences, none have any apparent actual 1st hand knowledge of what it is like to work in science full time in what they call 'the mainstream.' I do, and many others, Iv talked about this with people i know and all of them agree that the system of alternatives could do with more help, though they do not agree that it is as cut and dry as you people suggest.

a reply to: AnarchoCapitalist

There are no known ways of producing that much hydrogen in such a confined space using so little power.

That statement would tend to include the machine that is the subject of the OP.

originally posted by: Xeven
If real this should send common car gas to about 20 cents a gallon. Wont need coal either coal plants could be converted to use Hydrogen etc...

If this real i think it will sky rocket the price of gas , they will still need to make billions in profit but with less transactions.

a reply to: rickymouse
You are correct,all those unemployed fossil fuel workers will be on a gov't handout,just like the buggy whip makers and the whale oil lamp makers! Seriously,with cheap energy,and fossil fuels will get cheaper,as they won't be consumed at the same rate if this device really works,more US companies will stay here instead of overseas.Unless they need to pollute the air or water.

We have to remember that storing Hydrogen in cylinders is also a problem. I can't see them having big hydrogen cylinders in all vehicles the way people drive.

a reply to: ErosA433

There's very little in this life that is as cut and dried as most people tend to believe, except perhaps that we are all eventually going to do die one way or another.

I tend to think, if people around the world are going to have accidents, including terminal accidents in pretty much ANY sphere of Human endeavour, from making a couple of slices of toast in the morning to working in an oil refinery that blows up or catches fire or just driving your car to work in the morning, we must accept these as part and parcel of existence.

There's no other choice...it happens, it will always happen, we just have to balance the associated risks versus the benefits for not only the individual, but for the entire biosphere.

It makes no difference to the ultimate personal outcome of having an accident and dying trying to fiddle with a piece of toast stuck in a toaster, a car crash that mangles you in your car, or experimenting with a totally environmentally clean and essentially cost free energy source...except that using the clean energy on a global scale, we all win.

People will always die, some naturally, some will be unnatural...and that's always unfortunate, but that will happen anyway regardless of what hugely beneficial and Earth changing energy technology we introduce.

Life is risky and ultimately fatal.

originally posted by: rickymouse
We have to remember that storing Hydrogen in cylinders is also a problem. I can't see them having big hydrogen cylinders in all vehicles the way people drive.

Yes, Hydrogen causes traditional metal container embrittlement and failure.

New types of container and storage methods are available though, using carbon fibre and composites for the containers instead of metal, and other ideas that work include not storing the gas under pressure but in powdered form, using hydrides.

The gas bonds with the hydrides and is released on demand.

It has the benefit of being non explosive, and when combined with the powdered hydride, only burns with a smoulder, a little life a fast burning cigarette burns.

But more of this tech produces Hydrogen that is not intended to be stored, it is being generated to be used immediately on demand.

Evolve the gas, immediately burn it to make heat for water or industrial apps. Or burn it straight in a car engine or generator.

The same would probably happen in power stations. They'd make the H, use it to drive turbines and produce electricity as required, no storage issues.

originally posted by: AnarchoCapitalist

originally posted by: jonnywhite

There's your problem. You think a very well supported theory is crap. And theory of course is not hypothetical. Theory is something grounded on evidence, lots of it. Like hundreds of years of it.

I'm not sure how this is "my problem."

It's a junk theory.

It can't explain LENR and it can't explain Blacklight's results either.

It's as much "junk" as this is "verified".

Wanting something to be true does not make it so.

a reply to: MysterX

Not sure what relevance this has to the statement made, but sure ok. Its something that logical thinkers understand from a very young age. The concept of mortality doesn't baffle

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: AnarchoCapitalistwhile allegedly " transmuting " oxygen > hydrogen - one has to ask - where do the neutrons go ?

Where do the neutrons go and why is there no neutron radiation given off .
en.wikipedia.org...