Chemistry Talk

Androcles · Guest

"Fred Kasner" <fkasner@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:cNj%j.5547$Ri.2129@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com...
| Androcles wrote:
| > "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
| > news:Zvg%j.33067$3j.5246@trnddc05...
| > | "Don Stauffer in Minnesota" <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote in message
| > |
news:0675a4e0-3d55-40f2-bd3f-c864a4a4b99e@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| > | > Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
| > | >> A couple years ago, there was a thread in rec.autos.tech
| > | >> about devices to electrolyze water and feed the gases
| > | >> into an engine, supposedly greatly increasing gas mileage.
| > | >>
| > | >
| > | "Don Stauffer in Minnesota" wrote:
| > | > It is based on a myth. While it is well-known that the efficiency
of
| > | > the IC engine is around the 30-40% mark at best, the myth is that
this
| > | > is due to incomplete combustion, and that most of the fuel goes out
| > | > the tailpipe. This is not true. Almost all fuel in a properly
tuned
| > | > engine is combusted.
| > | >
| > | > The two energy losses are heat into the cooling jacket of any cooled
| > | > engine, and the energy (heat and pressure) in the exhaust. While
| > | > there have been attempts at building uncooled (adiabatic) engines,
the
| > | > biggest hangup so far is the lubricants. When internal temps get
too
| > | > high all existing lubricants break down.
| > | >
| > | > Turbocharging does recover some exhaust energy, but we cannot take
out
| > | > too much exhaust energy, or it will limit engine's ability to
breath,
| > | > reducing horsepower for a given engine size. We can indeed increase
| > | > thermal consumption by this road, but it results in a heavier
engine.
| > | > That is okay for a stationary engine, but any engine used in
| > | > transportation, must be as light as possible. If a heavy but more
fuel
| > | > efficient engine is used, the total vehicle weight goes up,
requiring
| > | > more energy, so we end up still burning more fuel Sad

| > | >
| > | hanson wrote:
| > | Don, you are kind but you won't change any minds in the
| > | Alternative- or Hydrogen fuel cults. They have their minds
| > | made up to get to their vapid heaven... with a religious passion.
| > | Whenever the fuel prices rise you see 2 phenomena emerging:
| > | (1) the compulsive savers who wish to beat the transportation
| > | game at any cost and hence believe anything.
| > | (2) the conning saviors who accommodate their fantasies
| > | with any scam the can lay on (1)
| > | Here is how the current dreams and schemes of (1) and (2)
| > | will end up, since these 2 cults reject not only the iron existence
| > | of the laws of thermodynamics but also refuse to believe in
| > | games that the powerful oil boys play:
| > | < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/8b67fce923b56a19 >
| > | < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/0aa53c5ef7317f6b >
| > | < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/bb4dbe2a7fac0a34 >
| > | ahahaha.... ahahahanson
| > |
| > I like the idea of hydrogen as a fuel, don't you?
| > The problem I see with it is that it takes a lot of crude oil to
electrolyze
| > the water in the first place and you can't carry much hydrogen around in
| > a compressed state without cooling it to way down low, which adds up
| > to danger.
| > What's needed is another Nobel, someone to come up with a way of
| > making it as safe as nitro-glycerine in clay, there when you need it but
| > safe enough to toss around.
| > Don't you chemical whizzes know of something, a catalyst perhaps, that
| > can do that? Perhaps if you bonded it with some inexpensive substance
| > like carbon, there is plenty of coal still around...
| > .
| > .
| > .
| > .
| > .
| > .
| > .
| > .
| > .
| > .
| > .
| > Smile

))
| >
|
| That idea has been played around with on this NG many years ago. Jed
| Checketts, a sincere, but misinformed inventor produced an encapsulated
| version of NaH or Na that could be crushed and dropped into water to
| produce hydrogen. He saw this a way to produce hydrogen on demand to
| feed an engine. However the dangers of hydrogen aside he was also
| transporting a dangerous solution for a passenger vehicle that was a lye
| solution. Can you see the hazard when a collision sundered the tank and
| a strong lye solution splashed out onto a city street? Also his
| processes for producing the NaH used some considerable chemical
| processes which produced the CO2 that he felt he was avoiding in such a
| process. He eventually left the field and sold his company for producing
| the process. We have heard no more of this and Jed has not been on this
| NG for quite a few years. I can see a couple of niche uses for such a
| system but not any wide spread use. Getting rid of the lye solution is
| one super problem.
| FK

Never underestimate the inventiveness of humanity, Fred. Not every idea
works as it is first proposed but sooner or later an intelligent mind with
the necessary experience will solve any technological problem the market
demands.
http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/gallery/saturn/SaturnV.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/3/37/20070113195808!Leonardo_da_Vinci_helicopter.jpg--AndroclesWhy did Einstein saythe speed of light from A to B is c-v,the speed of light from B to A is c+v,the "time" each way is the same? http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

Brent P · Guest

On 2008-05-28, jim <"sjedgingN0sp"@m> wrote:

hanson · Guest

"Fred Kasner" <fkasner@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:cNj%j.5547$Ri.2129@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com...

jim · Guest

Brent P wrote:

Brent P · Guest

On 2008-05-28, jim <"sjedgingN0sp"@m> wrote:

HLS · Guest

"Brent P" <tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com> wrote in message

jim · Guest

Brent P wrote:

hanson · Guest

"Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
news:Pik%j.33123$cZ3.978@newsfe10.ams2...

Brent P · Guest

On 2008-05-29, jim <"sjedgingN0sp"@m> wrote:

Androcles · Guest

"hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
news:zHn%j.15470$9H6.5014@trnddc04...
|
| "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| news:Pik%j.33123$cZ3.978@newsfe10.ams2...
| > "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
| > news:tOh%j.8558$nx6.7393@trnddc03...
| > | "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| > | news:nnh%j.35882$_c7.31118@newsfe16.ams2...
| > | > "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
| > | > news:Zvg%j.33067$3j.5246@trnddc05...
| > | > | "Don Stauffer in Minnesota" <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote in
message
| >
news:0675a4e0-3d55-40f2-bd3f-c864a4a4b99e@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
| > | > | > Mark Thorson <nos...@sonic.net> wrote:
| > | > | >> A couple years ago, there was a thread in rec.autos.tech
| > | > | >> about devices to electrolyze water and feed the gases
| > | > | >> into an engine, supposedly greatly increasing gas mileage.
| > | > | >
| > | > | "Don Stauffer in Minnesota" wrote:
| > | > | > It is based on a myth. While it is well-known that the
efficiency
| > | > | > of the IC engine is around the 30-40% mark at best, the myth is
| > | > | > that this is due to incomplete combustion, and that most of the
| > | > | > fuel goes out the tailpipe. This is not true. Almost all fuel
in
| > | > | > a properly tunedengine is combusted. The two energy
| > | > | > losses are heat into the cooling jacket of any cooled
| > | > | > engine, and the energy (heat and pressure) in the exhaust.
While
| > | > | > there have been attempts at building uncooled (adiabatic)
engines,
| > | > | > the biggest hangup so far is the lubricants. When internal
temps
| > | > | > get too high all existing lubricants break down.
| > | > | > Turbocharging does recover some exhaust energy, but we cannot
| > | > | > take out too much exhaust energy, or it will limit engine's
| > | > | > ability to breath,reducing horsepower for a given engine
| > | > | > size. We can indeed increase thermal consumption by this
| > | > | > road, but it results in a heavier engine.
| > | > | > That is okay for a stationary engine, but any engine used in
| > | > | > transportation, must be as light as possible. If a heavy but
more
| > | > | > fuel sufficient engine is used, the total vehicle weight goes
up,
| > | > | > requiringmore energy, so we end up still burning more fuel Sad

| > | > | >
| > | > | hanson wrote:
| > | > | Don, you are kind but you won't change any minds in the
| > | > | Alternative- or Hydrogen fuel cults. They have their minds
| > | > | made up to get to their vapid heaven... with a religious passion.
| > | > | Whenever the fuel prices rise you see 2 phenomena emerging:
| > | > | (1) the compulsive savers who wish to beat the transportation
| > | > | game at any cost and hence believe anything.
| > | > | (2) the conning saviors who accommodate their fantasies
| > | > | with any scam the can lay on (1)
| > | > | Here is how the current dreams and schemes of (1) and (2)
| > | > | will end up, since these 2 cults reject not only the iron
existence
| > | > | of the laws of thermodynamics but also refuse to believe in
| > | > | games that the powerful oil boys play:
| > | > | < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/8b67fce923b56a19 >
| > | > | < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/0aa53c5ef7317f6b >
| > | > | < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/bb4dbe2a7fac0a34 >
| > | > | ahahaha.... ahahahanson
| > | > |
| > | Androlces wrote:
| > | > I like the idea of hydrogen as a fuel, don't you?
| > | > The problem I see with it is that it takes a lot of crude oil to
| > | > electrolyze
| > | > the water in the first place and you can't carry much hydrogen
| > | > around in a compressed state without cooling it to way down
| > | > low, which adds up to danger.
| > | > What's needed is another Nobel, someone to come up with
| > | > a way of making it as safe as nitro-glycerine in clay, there when
| > | > you need it but safe enough to toss around. Don't you
| > | > chemical whizzes know of something, a catalyst perhaps, that
| > | > can do that? Perhaps if you bonded it with some inexpensive
| > | > substance like carbon, there is plenty of coal still around...
| > | > .
| > | hanson wrote:
| > | Yes, all the technologies for AF & H have been here for a long time.
| > | But the issue is whether they will catch on widespread and for good.
| > | I say no, because even after tapping and using up only 1% of all the
| > | existing C&CH reserves, the real "Peak Oil" is at least 1500 years
| > | in the future... See details of why in above links. The last time, in
| > | the 1970's when has we such an oil spasm... Prez Carted ordered the
| > | SYNFUEL project which the oil boys promptly bankrupted simply by
| > | dropping the crude oil price to $10 (ten) / bbl... ahahaha...
| > | This time around it boils down to a contest of wills:
| > | ::: Is it cheaper to change the lifestyle of some 4 billion people
| > | ::: (EU, US, IN, CH etc) by green preachings.... or to force a
| > | ::: change of the behavior in a pitifully small fraction of 0.6% of
| > | ::: that 4 billion, in some 25 million Iraqis? ...
| > | ::: "Global oil demand has increased only by 1% last year,
| > | ::: So why has the oil price risen by 200% in that same time"?...
| > | >
| > | ahahaha .. See the "why" details in the above links... ahaha..
| >
| Androcles wrote:
| > You missed my grin.
| > I don't write "hahaha" when I'm joking, that's your logo.
| >
| hanson wrote:
| ahaha... I wondered what that [ Smile

)) ] was in Kasners
| mangled post when I replied to him... Sorry about that, chief.
| >
| Androcles wrote:
| > Even I know hydrogen bonded to carbon is fuel, whether in
| > a potato, cellulose, polyethylene, gasoline or chicken shit.
| > There really is not much
| > difference between a carbohydrate and a hydrocarbon,
| >
| hanson wrote :
| .... yeah, right AFA your remark on "energy is in the bond" but only
| right, sort of, on "not much difference between a carbohydrate and
| a hydrocarbon". See, written in a brutto fashion the Hydrocarbons
| are essentially -(CH2)x ... which stores far more energy then do the
| Carbohydrates which are essentially --(CH2O)x, wherefrom you
| can easily see that CH2O can be rewritten into C + H2O or into
| CO + H2... IOW, Carbohydrates are half burnt down Hydrocarbons
| and carry much less energy in them.

Ok, I did not know that, although I knew oxygen was involved. Seems
to me that biological systems have to operate slower than is actually
possible for evolutionary reasons, although hydrocarbons and
carbohydrates are both biological in origin. (Unless you go along with
the god idea, in which case Allah dumped it in the ground exactly as He
made it, where His chosen people, the Arabs, could find it and get rich
on the backs of Shell and BP.)
Speaking of which I had a Jehovah's Witness banging on my door this
morning, I told the crank to fuck off and quit bothering me when I'm
busy.

See here for more on the issue:
| http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/35be49f4be7ddb4b
| wherein it says:
| Methane or Octane is 100% fuel -- Ethanol is only 60% fuel and
| Methanol even less with only 44% fuel... the rest is water...
| ahahahaha....
| >
| Androcles wrote:
| > the energy is in the bond, not the elements, and the economics
| > is in the cost of extracting it. So when I suggested bonding
| >hydrogen to carbon I was reinventing
| > Nature's wheel.
| > This was the first use of the all natural hydrogen energy system:
| > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcomen_steam_engine
| > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stephenson%27s_Rocket.jpg
| > If the green shits want it green, then this wood burner is as green as
| > it gets: http://www.erichall.eu/images/USA2002/sw2026.jpg
| > Not even the Iraqis want that.
| >
| hanson wrote:
| No, the Iraqis don't need that in the first place, and the Green
| shits wouldn't tolerate it neither because in many respects their
| green gaja religion is as extremist and fanatical as are the
| monotheistic religions, in particular the Jewish and the Islamic
| cults. The Enviros must be implicated in the sick & silly oil game
| as much as the kikes and Ass-venters are. To wit: Green terrorism:
| http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/d8c8b22b4ffedd09
| wherein it says:
| "If the green bastards would not have stymied all nuclear
| reactor developments, for the last 40 years, we would have
| today plenty of cheap electricity, like France & Japan. We'd
| have licked rad-chem disposal problems, we'd have modern
| batteries and advanced capacitors in our cars instead of
| gas-tanks and we would be driving in hi-powered nonpolluting
| electric cars, and we would not be implicated and heavily
| influenced by the irrational behavior of America's parasite, Israel
| who has not managed to live in peace with its neighbors for
| the last 60 years and has conned the US into treaty guarantees
| that Israel will get all the oil it needs first, form the US, even if the
| US must ration oil for it own citizens..... ahahaha... AHAHAHA...
| >
| If it would not have been for the Green shits, in all likelihood we
| would also have the H-fusion problems licked, and we would not
| be survival dependant on, & being held hostage by Venez-Hugos,
| Imams, Sheiks & Nigerios.... all of'em fomenters and financiers of
| terrorism against the West ... the same West which has brought
| to these upstarts wealth and power in the first place.... ahahahaha....
| ironic, isn't it... ahahaha... No good deep ever goes unpunished!
| >
| To boot, if the green cocksuckers would not have impeded the
| development of nuclear reactors for the last 40 years we would
| not have their latest issue neither they crying now over, their
| alleged Anthropic Global Warming of today... ahahaha... ..
| hahahaha... ahahahanson

I'd be careful with fusion. It's a theory only and could be right for
the wrong reasons. H-bombs do exist but it takes a fission bomb's
energy to light up hydrogen. I have as much faith in Tokomaks
ever working as I do in the alchemists turning base metal into gold,
even if anyone succeeds the cost outweighs the advantages.
What with cranks like Hawking providing the influence over the bright
young sparks of tomorrow just as the crank Einstein influenced him,
it will be a slow and painful process.

The pity of it all is that the energy is wasted; if society went in for
greater efficiency - things like better insulation, heat pumps, washing
containers instead of melting them down to make new containers
the costs would be dramatically reduced. I was watching a show
on TV about the construction of the science base at the south pole
and although I don't give a flying fuck about Big Bang theories
or Dark Energy, I was impressed by the construction of the base
which is scavenging every bit of heat from the motor generators.
Building high tech in those conditions is tough, I take my hat off
to all those guys. When you have to use duct tape to prevent
frost bite from taking your nose off then you are not working in
the most comfortable place.

| >
| >
| > --
| > Androcles wrote:
| > Why did Einstein say
| > the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
| > the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
| > the "time" each way is the same?
| > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
| >
|
|
|
|

hanson · Guest

"Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
news:taq%j.20560$Zs3.5432@newsfe20.ams2...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/e67060fff6c23741
"hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
news:zHn%j.15470$9H6.5014@trnddc04...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/cd8ff20673edb656
about the oil crisis, its players and the games they play, like here
< http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/8b67fce923b56a19 >
< http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/0aa53c5ef7317f6b >
< http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/bb4dbe2a7fac0a34 >
including the use of alternative / Bio fuels
< http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/35be49f4be7ddb4b >
and how Prez Carter's SYNFUEL project got ruined/bankrupted
after the 1970 oil crisis, in which the Arabs turned the oil spigot
off, because of the USA's policy preferences towards its parasite,
Israel but, why in/from 2007 on the Arabs, instead of turning off
the oil tap fully again, they let the oil run and simply said:
"Let the dumb fucking goyim PAY US, THE ARABS, for their
love of and their dependency on the Jews... We'll see how
much and how long the gyoim will carry that Jewish yoke &
burden.. while we rake in the dough"... which is seen in that:
::: "Global oil demand has increased only by 1% last year,
::: So why has the oil price risen by 200% in that same time"?...

Androcles · Guest

"hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
news:lTJ%j.31883$9H6.22661@trnddc04...
| "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
| news:taq%j.20560$Zs3.5432@newsfe20.ams2...
| http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/e67060fff6c23741
| "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> wrote in message
| news:zHn%j.15470$9H6.5014@trnddc04...
| http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/cd8ff20673edb656
| about the oil crisis, its players and the games they play, like here
| < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/8b67fce923b56a19 >
| < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/0aa53c5ef7317f6b >
| < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/msg/bb4dbe2a7fac0a34 >
| including the use of alternative / Bio fuels
| < http://groups.google.com/group/sci.chem/msg/35be49f4be7ddb4b >
| and how Prez Carter's SYNFUEL project got ruined/bankrupted
| after the 1970 oil crisis, in which the Arabs turned the oil spigot
| off, because of the USA's policy preferences towards its parasite,
| Israel but, why in/from 2007 on the Arabs, instead of turning off
| the oil tap fully again, they let the oil run and simply said:
| "Let the dumb fucking goyim PAY US, THE ARABS, for their
| love of and their dependency on the Jews... We'll see how
| much and how long the gyoim will carry that Jewish yoke &
| burden.. while we rake in the dough"... which is seen in that:
| ::: "Global oil demand has increased only by 1% last year,
| ::: So why has the oil price risen by 200% in that same time"?...
| >
| Also, the Enviros must be implicated in the sick & silly oil game
| as much as the kikes and Ass-venters are. To wit: Green terrorism:
| http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/d8c8b22b4ffedd09
| wherein it says:
| "If the green bastards would not have stymied all nuclear
| reactor developments, for the last 40 years, we would have
| today plenty of cheap electricity, like France & Japan. We'd
| have licked rad-chem disposal problems, we'd have modern
| batteries and advanced capacitors in our cars instead of
| gas-tanks and we would be driving in hi-powered nonpolluting
| electric cars, and we would not be implicated and heavily
| influenced by the irrational behavior of America's parasite, Israel
| who has not managed to live in peace with its neighbors for
| the last 60 years and has conned the US into treaty guarantees
| that Israel will get all the oil it needs first, form the US, even if the
| US must ration oil for it own citizens..... ahahaha... AHAHAHA...
| >
| Androcles wrote:
| The pity of it all is that the energy is wasted; if society went in for
| greater efficiency - things like better insulation, heat pumps, washing
| containers instead of melting them down to make new containers
| the costs would be dramatically reduced. I was watching a show
| on TV about the construction of the science base at the south pole
| and although I don't give a flying fuck about Big Bang theories
| or Dark Energy, I was impressed by the construction of the base
| which is scavenging every bit of heat from the motor generators.
| Building high tech in those conditions is tough, I take my hat off
| to all those guys. When you have to use duct tape to prevent
| frost bite from taking your nose off then you are not working in
| the most comfortable place.
| >
| hanson wrote:
| Interesting observation, Andro, though we are drifting off the
| immediate subject matter now, it is so true what you say.
| Like the S-pole station staffers, almost any desired condition
| can be achieved in small isolated communities, or under stress
| conditions in large societies as well, like for instance during
| times of war ...where people do or must think alike & fall in line.
| >
| True, recycling and its benefits are great and much less
| wasteful than the way we live now. However consider what
| Enviros now call "waste" is someone else's **income**, the
| bread and butter on the tables for those millions of people,
| who do produce and bring you these "through away" items
| of convenience. --- Strictly, academically speaking there is
| never any waste. "Waste", like beauty, is in the eye of the
| beholder. "Waste" is simply an energy- & goods consumption
| format which others do disagree with.... ahahaha...
| >
| Remember, during WWII we had all kinds of recycling programs
| in place, as mandates... but as soon as that hardship was over
| we began to enjoy life's more pleasant annuities to the hilt...
| ... until the Green shits appeared and saw golden chances to
| fatten their wallets, via permit charges, user fees, enviro sur-
| taxes, recycling prepays and now a looming Carbon head tax,
| all legalized extortions which they the institutionalized, after scaring
| the people, by declaring that everything was polluted and that the
| earth must be saved. The Green shits operated strictly according
| to the edicts of their green Bible that says:
| Green Genesis:
| 1 "It doesn't matter what is true ... it only matters what people
| = believe is true. -- Paul Watson, Sea Shepard/ex-Greenpeace, &...
| 2 "A lot of environmental [sci/soc/pol] messages a