Academies Play Catch Up With New (old) Technologies


In this videolink HERE, a Massachussetts Institute Of Technology professor, Dan Nocera, explains how he has ‘discovered’ a technology which will transform the way we receive energy into our homes. No need for centrally generated electricity any more, he says. The sun will be used to produce electricity which will be used with a catalyst to produce hydrogen and oxygen from water.

These will be stored and in turn be used to create electricity on demand by the use of a fuel cell.

It’s funny how the technos are scambling to catch up with what’s been happening in garden sheds and garages across the globe for a while now. People are powering their cars by splitting water into its component gases – hydrogen and oxygen. These gases derived from water by electrolysis are being used to create energy in internal combustion engines, and also being used for heating homes.

The poor guy in the video is trying to stop the credit for the technological breakthroughs escaping his learned institution as ordinary Joes are already making good money out by saving fuel all over the place, and have been doing so for a while. (splitting water by using electricity with a catalyst has been known about since 1895).

There is no need to use solar power to derive the electricity to split the water even, as that is expensive to install. Water-splitting is a power multiplier even if you start with electricity out of a plug.

The problem this guy doesn’t mention is how will he store the hydrogen in peoples’ homes as he hopes to do. That too is very expensive and not easy. The best alternative is to split water into hydrogen and oxygen as you need power or heat, and burn them immediately. Never mind about the photovoltaic solar cells, storing hydrogen and oxygen gases, and the use of fuel cells. That’s all just to keep his colleagues in a job.

The only ‘new’ discovery is that splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen creates energy – and yet that’s already been around over 100 years. It’s only because gasoline was so cheap that no one bothered with it. It’s economics, professor – not technology – that is the new factor. But yes, that won’t bring in the $10 million grants you guys live on. We understand. You have to try to make it sound complicated and expensive.

Meanwhile the world will be getting on with powering itself the cheapest way it can -just as it always did. And I am just as sure that professors will still be trying to pull big grants for more ‘research’ by confusing politicians, just like bears shit in the woods. Trouble is, with energy right now, guys like this professor are wasting our time by making it unnecessarily complicated. We can get cheap power from water. We need to get on with it.

The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

5 Responses to “Academies Play Catch Up With New (old) Technologies”

  1. Freddy says:

    Um, don’t mean to be rude, but you’re talking complete rubbish here.
    There are no nuclear reactions going on, so there is no “creation” of energy. You are just converting it between electrical energy, chemical energy and heat. Each conversion will involve some degree of inefficiency, i.e., energy lost as heat.

    > “Water-splitting is a power multiplier even if you start with electricity out of a plug.”

    What do you think you are saying here ? Are you expecting to get more energy from recombining the hydrogen and oxygen than you originally put in to split them ? Ain’t gonna happen.

    > “The only ‘new’ discovery is that splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen creates energy”

    No, it transforms electrical energy to chemical energy, loosely speaking. Convert it back again, you will get less energy than you put in. The only point to this is to store energy, which might make sense if there is a big difference in the cost or availability of electricity at different times of day. The cost difference would have to be enough to overcome the inevitable inefficiencies of the process.

    > “We can get cheap power from water. “

    No, we can’t.

  2. tapestry says:

    My brother splits water in his car and gets 50 miles per gallon of fuel where he used to get 40 miles per gallon, by adding hydrogen and oxygen into the air feed to the engine. So do hundreds of thousands of other people.

    Experience triumphs over theory.

  3. Anonymous says:

    What you are effectively saying is that you can:
    1. Convert water into hydrogen
    2. Burn or react that hydrogen resulting in left over water again.
    3. repeat, getting more energy out of the reaction every time, ie perpetual motion.

    Its not happening, its not possible, you can’t create free magic energy out of nothing.

    There are other possible reasons to explain why injecting hydrogen into a car engine might “improve efficiency”, but no new energy is being ‘created’.

  4. tapestry says:

    I follow your argument.

    But I also see my brother’s car achieving greatly raised mpg from burning hydrogen, made by splitting water, which returns to water.

    Water creates electricity when combined with another force – that of gravity. Why should it not combine with another unseen force when it splits and recombines?

    Let’s say that if energy is not created, maybe it is transferred from elsewhere of, as yet unknown origin.

  5. tapestry says:

    this from halfbakery comments –

    Extracting hydrogen from _distilled_ water, like we did in high school chemistry, does use a lot more energy than results from burning it again. Doping the water greatly reduces the energy necessary to coax apart the bonds.

    Further, research has been done showing that water being plastered with ultrasonics comes apart very easily, yielding far more energy than consumed by the electrolysis.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.