Browns gas

www.nottaughtinschools.com...

I read about it in a book I borrowed from the library:

The Atlantis Blueprint: Unlocking the mystery of a long-lost civilization
ISBN 90 4390 233 0

so I started searching the net..

The book claims when Browns gas is burned, it has a temperature of 130�C
but it melts everything...

It neutralizes radioactive materials (It is used in China a lot for this reason..?)

When used for making gold, the amount of gold got out of a same amount of gold ore is ten times more than with the process we use.

More to come as I'm reading further..

(it's not free energy)





[Edited on 5-6-2004 by alienaddicted]

(realplayer needed)

Watch a Real Player 28 minute video demo of Brown's Gas:

bwt.jeffotto.com...


Watch Brown's Gas cut 7" of steel

bwt.jeffotto.com...



from: bwt.jeffotto.com...


low quality unfortunately (realplayer ), and I can't understand the guy quite often.






[Edited on 5-6-2004 by alienaddicted]

Wny hot use this brown gas? If it nuetralizes radioctavi materilas we cold very well use it and it could be very helpful...

Don't ask me!

If it does what's claimed it does, I don't understand why this isn't in use yet?

if im right im my thinking browns gas is a mixture of hydrogen and somthing else.

So the cost of making browns gas is probabley very high, and if you've seen the size of the rasioactive waste dumps you would need literally tons. Have a search for a few pictures of the toxic waste dumps around the would there massive, I remember seeing some in a docu' about dirty bombs. Bigger than football piches and as high as 5 story buildings. This would mean the cost fo getting rid of all this would be astonomical. Cheaper just to sit and guard them.

I think we should send it all to the sun or into space, but its a bit dangerous getting it up there, wouldnt want that rocket exploding :-|

Browns Gas could be very useful but the equipment needed to use it have been of dubious quality and in short supply. I doubt that you will see a large scale use of Browns gas anytime soon since most welding is done by robots now and quite effeciently to boot.

If this thing can nuetralize radioactive materials then ALL contries should pay money to make more of it. There is a LOT of radioactive wates on Earth. Thousands of tons of waste that is very dangerous to any living thing on the planet that we know of.

Originally posted by Andy Robins
if im right im my thinking browns gas is a mixture of hydrogen and
something else.
So the cost of making browns gas is probabley very high,

(from the site mentioned in my second post)

Six Reasons Brown's Gas is Superior for Welding / Cutting:
1. Dramatically Reduce Welding Fuel Expense

Brown's Gas can save as much as 70% of the cost to cut with oxy-acetylene and up to 70 % of the cost to weld with MIG or TIG welders.
Brown's Gas can save up to two-thirds of the cost to braze when compared with any other equipment.
2. Make All of Your Welding Fuel On-Site

Do away with lugging and storing heavy and dangerous tanks of oxygen, acetylene or argon.
Never worry again about running out of gas.
Eliminate nuisance checkups by regulatory agencies.
3. One Piece of Equipment Enables You To Cut Steel, Weld Similar and Dissimilar Metals and Even Weld Aluminum.

4. Brown's Gas is cleaner to weld with, emits no toxic exhaust and is a very safe mixture.

The flame contains hydrogen and oxygen only.
When you burn Brown's Gas the exhaust is water.
The physical properties of Brown's Gas make it very safe.
5. Hot Temperature Benefits of Brown's Gas.

The temperature of the Brown's Gas flame when it is not in contact with a material is only 259 to 279 degrees F.
This same flame will exceed 13,000 degrees Fahrenheit and can sublimate tungsten.
6. Quality Welding and Cutting In One Machine.

The welds made with Brown's Gas are certifiable welds.
Brown's Gas will smoothly cut through just about any thickness of steel using only water and oxygen.
Cutting with Brown's Gas is faster and cheaper than cutting with other gases or equipment.


and if you've seen the size of the rasioactive waste dumps you would need literally tons. Have a search for a few pictures of the toxic waste dumps around the would there massive, I remember seeing some in a docu' about dirty bombs. Bigger than football piches and as high as 5 story buildings. This would mean the cost fo getting rid of all this would be astonomical. Cheaper just to sit and guard them.

I think we should send it all to the sun or into space

, but its a bit dangerous getting it up there, wouldnt want that rocket exploding :-|

I don't think Mr. extraterrestrial would like that.

Yes BlackJackal, heard about that too, but make a few nukes less, and start a decent factory and the problem will be solved...(I guess)

[Edited on 5-6-2004 by alienaddicted]

The whole concept relies on the idea that you can just 'make' H20 lose its diatomicity, and become monoatomic. The whole concept of monoatomicity is just ludicrous.. This site can't even spell right half the time..

Guys, this isn't a viable replacement for energy, this is some idiot who decided to have fun with highly pressurised gas one day.

Really, have you read the site?

Have you looked at this objectively?

I mean, you're obviously just giving this guy the massive benefit of the doubt, where he says things like:

The flame will vaporize Tungsung steel (the hardest metal on earth), but will not burn your hand!

>> Um, yeah. They must mean 'Tungsten', and, how does this chop metal and not touch flesh?

2500 liters of browns gas costs 65 cents to produce. With accedilane, the same volume is $50, i.e. a 2% cost (and there is no delivery charges for Browns Gas, because Browns Gas is water!).

>> No, that's 1.3% cost, and how about some proof here? I can tell you that seven elephants comprise 6/232nds of the weight of the moon. Really. No, I'm not going to back that up.

The starting fuel is water.

>> No, the starting fuel is some crazy monoatomic #e, you haven't said crap about how to get water to become this.

The end product is water.

>> Totally not science.


This implosion produces 16 over unity of power.

>> What the hell?

Watch brick melt!

>> What the hell?

Browns Gas is a very clean burning gas, there is no need to clean the torch head.

>> What the hell? Very clean burning? It doesn't burn! According to you it implodes!

Cast iron welds (with no flux) easily, then can be put directly into water to be cooled (will not shatter).

>> Oh, yeah freaking right. Suddenly, iron was cut/shaped by this gas, all the basis of metal welding and forging just drop away! Fantastic!

Any rust is automatically vaporized then welded since rust will vaporize an a lower temp then the metal.

>> Yeah, were it that the flame hit the exact spot where it would melt the oxide and not the metal, this would work. However, in most cases, it will either melt both or neither.

Torch is laser like (2 foot flame, but only see 4 inches) you can use it to cut metals with laser precision.

>> So it is as thin as a photon's wave now? This is made up of burning gas, isn't it? That's millions of times larger than a laser - you lie! And of course, all flames that we see that are 4 inches long are really full 2 foot invisiflames. Duh! Of course!


Seriously guys, you're dissing yourselves.

Originally posted by Viendin
The whole concept relies on the idea that you can just 'make' H20 lose its diatomicity, and become monoatomic. The whole concept of monoatomicity is just ludicrous.. This site can't even spell right half the time..

_____
I don't know much about chemistry, but, what you mean with making water monoatomic is:

Making H and O out of H2O?

If this is the case, I think I remember from school that this is possible with electrolysis?

Please tell me when I'm wrong!
I'm not so good in this field.
______

Guys, this isn't a viable replacement for energy, this is some idiot who decided to have fun with highly pressurised gas one day.

Really, have you read the site?

Have you looked at this objectively?

I mean, you're obviously just giving this guy the massive benefit of the doubt, where he says things like:

The flame will vaporize Tungsung steel (the hardest metal on earth), but will not burn your hand!

>> Um, yeah. They must mean 'Tungsten', and, how does this chop metal and not touch flesh?

____
I don't know, in the video he goes with quickly with his hand trought the end of the flame (at 12m30s), but he definetly doesn't hold it there, is this also possible with a flame of acethylen/oxygen? need answers here
_____

2500 liters of browns gas costs 65 cents to produce. With accedilane, the same volume is $50, i.e. a 2% cost (and there is no delivery charges for Browns Gas, because Browns Gas is water!).

>> No, that's 1.3% cost, and how about some proof here? I can tell you that seven elephants comprise 6/232nds of the weight of the moon. Really. No, I'm not going to back that up.

The starting fuel is water.

>> No, the starting fuel is some crazy monoatomic #e, you haven't said crap about how to get water to become this.


The end product is water.

>> Totally not science.
____
He should be showing this in the end of the video.
____

This implosion produces 16 over unity of power.

>> What the hell?

Watch brick melt!

>> What the hell?

Browns Gas is a very clean burning gas, there is no need to clean the torch head.

>> What the hell? Very clean burning? It doesn't burn! According to you it implodes!

Cast iron welds (with no flux) easily, then can be put directly into water to be cooled (will not shatter).

>> Oh, yeah freaking right. Suddenly, iron was cut/shaped by this gas, all the basis of metal welding and forging just drop away! Fantastic!


Any rust is automatically vaporized then welded since rust will vaporize an a lower temp then the metal.

>> Yeah, were it that the flame hit the exact spot where it would melt the oxide and not the metal, this would work. However, in most cases, it will either melt both or neither.

Torch is laser like (2 foot flame, but only see 4 inches) you can use it to cut metals with laser precision.

>> So it is as thin as a photon's wave now? This is made up of burning gas, isn't it? That's millions of times larger than a laser - you lie! And of course, all flames that we see that are 4 inches long are really full 2 foot invisiflames. Duh! Of course!


Seriously guys, you're dissing yourselves.

U.S . patent 3,262,872









[edit on 6-6-2004 by alienaddicted]

2500 liters of browns gas costs 65 cents to produce. With accedilane, the same volume is $50, i.e. a 2% cost (and there is no delivery charges for Browns Gas, because Browns Gas is water!).

So why isnt everyone using it? because your more than likely have to use electricity to make browns gas. Electrolosis of water to get hydrogen out is only 30% effcient and uses horrid oil or nuclear powered electricity to extract it. so why not just burn dolla bills instead.

Until solar power is used on a widespread scale will such types of energywill never be cheap and used. But apperently the oil suppliers and there shareholders and the goverments that supply 40% of the global economy from oil having somthing to say about that.

oil companies also tend to patent and buy up new technologies so they dont pose a threat to there monopoly.

Andy
There is enough roof space on american homes to supply 70% of there energy needs. Only smarties have the answer




[edit on 6-6-2004 by Andy Robins]

Electrolysis doesn't cause water to split into monoatomic parts. Viendin is right that monoatomicity doesn't occur in hydrogen and oxygen except in some very rare cases. There is a possibility of oxygen and hydrogen radicals or ions. Radicals are very reactive and ions are very difficult to create in gas form. If this gas works, it doesn't work the way they say it does.

Patent 6,443,725

D. Thermal Reaction Characteristic

The Brown gas is a mixture gas that includes atomic hydrogen and oxygen dissociated from water. In the gas flame 77 generated during the combustion of the Brown gas, the atomic and molecular hydrogen and oxygen reacts. The atoms of hydrogen and oxygen infiltrate into the atomic nucleus of heated material. The material that is heated by the thermal reaction of hydrogen and oxygen is heated by the gas flame 77 hotter than flame generated during the combustion of gas in the atmosphere. The Brown gas melts aluminum at 700.degree. C. and evaporates tungsten while generating 6,000.degree. C. of heat. The Brown gas that shows various thermal reactions according to heated materials can weld the blocks 21 to iron while melting the blocks 21 and the iron.

The bold sentence confuses me a bit.

Does it say that the heated material is heated by a larger temperature than the temperature of the flame?

...which sounds weird...

CHECK IT OUT!


more videos here

I assume you won't understand much of what they say....

Electrolysis doesn't cause water to split into monoatomic parts. Viendin is right that monoatomicity doesn't occur in hydrogen and oxygen except in some very rare cases. There is a possibility of oxygen and hydrogen radicals or ions. Radicals are very reactive and ions are very difficult to create in gas form. If this gas works, it doesn't work the way they say it does.

This doesnt change the fact that electrolyzing water is the process for making browns gas. Making it very ineffcient.

Brown's Gas and Energy by Tom Napier
www.phact.org...

So-called Brown's Gas is a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen gas prepared by electrolyzing water. Generators which prepare Brown's Gas are sold for welding. Brown's Gas has also been proposed as a fuel for internal combustion engines and as an input gas for fuel cells. Here I propose to examine the energetics of Brown's Gas and the practicality of these latter applications.

All calculations are made in metric units with occasional translations. I shall also refer mainly to the mass of the gas since using volumes requires specifying the temperature and pressure. For illustration some masses will be translated into volumes at one atmosphere pressure and room temperature (75 F).

In electrolysis the output rate is a function of the molecular weight of the product, its valency and the total current passing through the electrolytic cell. One Faraday is that amount of current which will produce one gram.mole of a product with a valency of one. To split water, H2O, into H2 and O2 takes two Faradays per mole, that is two Faradays will convert 18 grams (about 0.635 oz) of water into Brown's Gas.
Two Faradays is equivalent to 193038 Coulombs. This equals the product of the current through the cell in amps and the time in seconds for which it passes. For example, if 5 amps pass through the cell it will take 193038/5 seconds or 10.72 hours to electrolyze 18 grams of water. Thus the output of a Brown's Gas generator operating at 5 amps would be 1.678 grams of gas per hour. At 500 amps the output would be 167.8 grams per hour and so on.
A cell running at 500 amps would produce 364 liters of Brown's Gas at atmospheric pressure every hour. (A liter of gas is about as much as a quart milk carton will hold.) My guess is that a welding torch uses some tens of liters of gas a minute. A practical Brown's Gas welder thus either has to operate at currents higher than 500 amps or must be operated in bursts.
Normally the current passing through the cell comes from a step-down transformer. At DC it takes some 1.7 volts to cause an electrolytic cell to operate. That is, our 500 amp cell is operating with a continuous power input of 850 watts. The AC input will be somewhat higher than this, depending on the details of the construction of the generator. Let's assume 1000 watts. That is, to generate 168 grams of gas requires one kilowatt.hour of electrical input or about 10 cents worth of electricity.

Suppose we wanted to run an internal combustion engine on this gas. How much energy would we get out? If we burn Brown's Gas we get pure water vapor. Burning 18 grams releases 242000 Joules of heat energy or 229.5 btu. (Allowing the vapor to condense would yield an additional 44500 joules, 42.4 btu, but in any conventional engine this output would only appear as waste heat and will be ignored.)
Thus if we drove an engine with 168 grams of gas per hour we would be putting 2.26 million joules per hour of heat energy into it. Operating at a plausible combustion temperature the thermal efficiency might be as high as 50% so we would get out 1.13 million joules per hour or 314 joules per second, that is 314 watts. The bottom line is that we have put in about a kilowatt of electrical energy to get out under a third as much in mechanical energy. Considering that the efficiency of an electric motor would be over 85% there is no justification at all for using a Brown's Gas generator and an internal combustion engine. An electric motor would do better at less cost and with far greater reliability.

It has also been proposed to use Brown's Gas in a fuel cell. Unless it is proposed to store the Brown's Gas, this is an inherently absurd idea. A fuel cell is fundamentally an electrolysis cell run backwards. That is, the same relationship between current passing and mass of input and output gas applies, less inevitable losses. If the oxygen and the hydrogen were generated separately, which they are not, an ideal fuel cell would generate a given current using exactly the same input gas flow as would be supplied by electrolyzing water with the same current. Unfortunately, the electrolysis cell requires an input voltage of around 1.7 volts while a practical hydrogen/oxygen fuel cell generates 1.23 volts in theory and perhaps 0.7 volts in practice. Thus the ratio of output electrical power to input electrical power would be roughly 42%. Operating such a system has no conceivable utility.

The only justification for such a double conversion would be if Brown's Gas could be stored in large quantities. Since Brown's Gas is an explosive mixture it would be hazardous to store any quantity of it at atmospheric pressure. To compress it for storage would be criminally stupid.

A standard cylinder used for storing hydrogen contains just over a cubic foot of gas under about 150 atmospheres pressure. At that pressure it would contain the equivalent of about 5380 liters of Brown's Gas. That is 2880 grams or 160 moles. At 242000 joules per mole a cylinder contains almost 39 million joules or 36700 btu.

There are two ways of looking at this. One is that the cylinder is a poor storage device since, for all its size and weight, it contains about as much energy as two pints of gasoline. The other is that each cylinder is the equivalent of 21 pounds of TNT in a steel tube. This is not something I'd want to have around!

as a counter point to the above, i did some checking and there a people who have issues with yull brown and the supposed special properties of browns gas:

www.phact.org...
www.phact.org...

The answer is the sun, that is the only free energy source. But currently not in global interest to move over to solar power. To much money being made off oil.

Whos going to send radioactive waste to the sun? It would cost way to much and take years. We dont have the technology yet.

i meant as an energy source

radioactive waste will just sit on a pile or in a hole in the ground, the cheap solution whos gonna pay to get rid of it, and whos going to force them to do it.

Maybe the problem lies closer to home and humanitys desire for cheaper and cheaper resources. Bit late now....