[RENAMED] New Fuel Cell System 'Generates Electricity with Only Water, Air'

[CoDer]

So they still use water to produce hydrogen, without water no hydrogen would be produced and it's not a perpetual machine.

Q. What's the point?
Q. Water is not the fuel?

A. Correct!

Q. What's the point now?

Q. They should use other than water to produce hydrogen through chemical reaction?

Utang na loob wag ng mag bangit ng high school chemistry at college physics....

[CoDer]

Double post again!

[donbuggy]

The point is:

- Water is not a fuel.
- Something is reacting with the water to make hydrogen, but we don't know what. That "something" could be the fuel. The title of this post "New Fuel Cell System 'Generates Electricity with Only Water, Air' " is misleading.

Utang na loob wag ng mag bangit ng high school chemistry at college physics....

And why not? Nothing wrong with reminding people about science.

[ghosthunter]

The title of this post "New Fuel Cell System 'Generates Electricity with Only Water, Air' " is misleading.

The original title was even more misleading, "water powered car".

[CoDer]

The point is:

- Water is not a fuel.
- Something is reacting with the water to make hydrogen, but we don't know what. That "something" could be the fuel. The title of this post "New Fuel Cell System 'Generates Electricity with Only Water, Air' " is misleading.

Yep that was misleading... But then again what was that they used to produce hydrogen again? I'm lost...

And why not? Nothing wrong with reminding people about science.

Here we go again, you go ahead and read your high school science book while others go to their laboratories to do the real science stuff. They're far more qualified, maybe you got my point now...

[CoDer]

The original title was even more misleading, "water powered car".

Oh boy, this thread is dead.

Don't waste it man shut this thread down...

[CoDer]

You'll have my outmost respect if your reply were like this.

I was surprised when a friend of mine sent me a link to this story (he’s an engineer, as I am). At first, I assumed this was a hoax. Some digging revealed that it probably isn’t a hoax, but a case of very sloppy reporting.

Dr. Novella mentioned the “membrane electrode assembly” which produces the hydrogen from water. That’s actually all there is to report here. The MEA uses some consumable chemical (it isn’t mentioned what, it could be a metal hydride) to produce hydrogen, which runs fuel cells for a grand total of 300 Watts. That’s too little to power a car, even a tiny one, so the unit charges a battery over several hours that, in turn, runs the car for a while.

The only noteworthy thing about this story is that the company in question is claiming to have improved their hydrogen-producing reaction device and their electricity-producing fuel cell. They made no claims–that I could find–on the longevity of the MEA (how long the reagent lasts), but one article said the unit’s energy capacity is “in testing”.

As best I can tell, the company made no fraudulent or misleading claims, but their unfortunate (and maybe mistranslated) quote that the car “requires nothing but water” to run was breathlessly reported over and over again. Since I don’t speak Japanese, I can’t tell if the company’s ACTUAL press release was misleading or just misinterpreted. It could be both, of course. Maybe they wanted to get a bunch of free press, so they penned an intentionally-unscientific release. If so, it will no doubt cost them in the long term.

For the record, as best I can confirm, there’s nothing controversial or mysterious here. There’s nothing magical. There’s really not even anything exciting, since there have been more thrilling improvements in hydrogen-generation science and fuel cell science in recent years.

I still don’t quite understand what this company is claiming to have done that’s so novel. Maybe they think they’re about to break through to an economically-competitive business model with their 300 Watt fuel cell system.

Skeptics should be careful about bandying about the term “hoaxers” and “frauds” based on preliminary, non-technical mass media reports.

As soon as I see a careful translation of actual Genepax assertions that they’ve violated the 1st Law, I’ll be the first in line with a multimeter and tar and feathers. For the moment, I’m satisfied to chalk this one up to abysmal media coverage.

Cheers,
Damian

Try reading "Professor Hydrogen" of Ice Land and surely you skeptics will cry perpetual foul blah... blah... blah...

To qoute some.

One car getting put through its paces is the Mercedes Benz A-class F-cell -- an electric car powered by a DaimlerChrysler fuel cell. Fuel cells generate electricity by converting hydrogen and oxygen into water. And fuel cell technology is clean -- the only by-product is water.

In 2003, Reykjavik opened a hydrogen fueling station to test three hydrogen fuel cell buses. The station was integrated into an existing gasoline and diesel station. The hydrogen gas is produced by electrolysis -- sending a current through water to split it into hydrogen and oxygen. The public buses could run all day before needing refueling.

The self generating design will be ages before it will become practical for commercial use.

[CoDer]

[ame="http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=bgGlE97rJl4"]Ice Land's Hydrogen Economy[/ame]

Check out the on site Hydrogen production infrastructure is the fueling station itself.

The smaller version of that if someone will be able to develop it, will be your car's engine. Maybe in 15 to 20 years? or more? I don't even care anymore, because it works. Water -> Hydrogen -> Water, and it's not perpetual science there are energy losses during the process.

Grow up for crying out loud.

[donbuggy]

http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2008...-on-water.html

Monday, June 16, 2008
[SIZE=3]How to Run a Car on Water [/SIZE]


Oh, it can be done. There are no scientific laws that say you can't run a car on water. In fact, I have personally made fire from water on a number of occasions. A Japanese company is the latest to claim they are running a car on water. See the video here:

Water-fuel car unveiled in Japan

However, what you can't do is run a car on water without overall energy inputs greater than you get from splitting the water. In simple terms, let's say you split water to create 10 BTUs of hydrogen. You can then use that to burn in the car, or to operate a fuel cell. When you burn the hydrogen, it reacts with oxygen to again form water. But if you want to take the water and turn it back into hydrogen, it will always take more than the 10 BTUs that you released in the first place.

So let's say it takes 12 BTUs of input to produce 10 BTUs of hydrogen from water. What's wrong with that? Well, why wouldn't you just use those 12 BTUs directly, instead of going through the step of cracking the water? This would be sort of like using gasoline in your car to produce steam to drive a steam engine that actually runs the car. But it's a lot more efficient to cut out the middleman and use the gasoline directly.

There are two possible scenarios in which this sort of scheme might make sense. One is if the conversion allowed you to operate a more efficient motor; say an electric motor instead of an internal combustion engine. The second is when it is more convenient to keep the fuel in a solid form, as was the case for my carbide lamp example. Since the fuel is only produced when water drips on the solid, there isn't a large inventory of flammable gas or liquid that can catch fire or explode.

However, it is important to keep in mind that there is a catch. There is a way to mask the energy input, and that is what the Japanese company is doing. I had to do a bit of research, but I finally found this:

Genepax unveils water energy fuel cell system

Within the story is the key to what's going on:

Though the company did not reveal any more detail the company president said that they had "succeeded in adopting a well-known process to produce hydrogen from water to the MEA", similar to the mechanism that produces hydrogen by a reaction of metal hydride and water.

That clued me in as to how they were pulling this off. Metal hydrides will react with water to produce hydrogen. For instance, sodium hydride (NaH) reacts spontaneously with water as follows:

NaH + H2O → H2 (gas) + NaOH ΔH = −83.6 kJ/mol, ΔG = −109.0 kJ/mol

So, if you had NaH in your car, and you dripped water on it, you would produce hydrogen from the water. What's the catch? Metal hydrides that react with water don't occur naturally, because they would have already reacted. This is the same reason hydrogen doesn't occur naturally on earth. So, it takes energy inputs to make the metal hydrides. And there is the hidden energy source in the water car. The car isn't really running on water. It is running on a combination of water and a very reactive compound that must be replenished.

Here's what the laws of thermodynamics tell you. Back to the 10 BTUs of energy we liberated for the water car; it would have taken well more than 10 BTUs to produce the metal hydride required for that reaction. (Note that they may not be using metal hydrides; there are other compounds that react with water to liberate hydrogen. Again, none occur naturally on earth in the reactive form, and all require significant energy inputs to produce).

So, the moral is: Sometimes it appears that the lunch is free, but the bill eventually comes anyway - when you have to replenish the catalyst. (Note: As others have correctly pointed out, the proper term here would be reagent instead of catalyst since it is almost certainly undergoing a transformation from one compound to another. I merely used the term Genepax used to describe the system.)

[donbuggy]

And coder, I designed an electric car in college.