Low energy Input, mass hydrogen output methods in use.

[Orange_Crusader]

It's orangecrusader at gmail dot com

Can I have a hint at what the picture is?

I'll also prepare diagrams of the idea to use the heat generated to make more electricity, it's very simple, goes well with the fairly simple M-cell design.

[thrival]

I sent an ms paint sketch to both your hotmail & gmail accounts
last nite; should be there by now.

[B0rriska]

anyway I could get a copy of the diagrams floating around.I'm understanding this I think and might have an easy solution(if I understand it properly) We all could use the whole PICTURE.(no pun intended) .We might need a third reaction chamber to make this work.Put me in coach...

[thrival]

I'll post it in my projects folder under H2 reactors, however the third
cell is Orange_Crusader's idea for which he deserves full credit.
In fact this project is a collaboration of everyone to date and in future who
has posted to this thread or built and tested same, with or without
anyone else's knowledge. It's public domain and my only interest is
keeping it alive long enough to find out if it can live outside the incubator.

Orange raised some issues that we need to come clean with right now.
He believes that the reaction between metals and acid will produce H2
by stripping it from the H2SO4 (sulfuric acid.) If true, it needs to be
replaced, and the third (central) cell is meant to do that. However, IF that
be the case, then our metal cells are splitting acid, not water, and
dependent upon a reaction in the central cell similar to Bob & Chris's
boxes to keep regenerating the H2 for the acid. In other words, there
would be little advantage in my opinion (although Orange does see
advantages) to a conventional booster.

I may have been incorrect in initial statements of what this cell will do.
I presumed the cell would split water, not acid, and AlaskaStar even
suggested the former. However I personally find some things he said
extremely vague, possibly even intentionally misleading. (At the time
he was discussing a proprietary technology of his own with an interest
to protect.)

Initially an H2SO4 reaction with metals would produce H2 and current as
expected, however the potential trouble occurs when we attempt to
recharge the cell. We know that splitting water involves a negative and
positive electrode where H2 & O gases are produced respectively. That
could leave O bound to one of the metals in the form of an oxide During
regeneration. An acid attacking the metal oxide would likely release the O,
not produce any H2 during that cycle in that cell, while the sulfate was
driven out of the other metal being regenerated. Long story short, we're
not 100% sure how the cell will behave. It's too early to say it won't work,
as described, and if not, there might still be work-arounds, depending how
much time and thought we put in. But there's a need to scale back the
expectations of readers until some of us can raise the resources to build
and test proper prototypes.

[Mako]

Going back through the thread...

[quote=thirval]
I may have been incorrect in initial statements of what this cell will do.
I presumed the cell would split water, not acid, and AlaskaStar even
suggested the former. However I personally find some things he said
extremely vague, possibly even intentionally misleading. (At the time
he was discussing a proprietary technology of his own with an interest
to protect.) [/quote]

[quote=AlaskaStar]the preliminary tests in a 5 gallon bucket, containing aproximately 1 gallon of fluid, and my catalyst material simply (and literally) dropped into it, and a lid fastened quickly thereafter, makes aproximately 114.288 CUBIC FEET of hydrogen in 8 minutes. afterward i am left with a bucket full of fertilizer, and water, i just pour the water off, and let the crystals dry out.[/quote]

So AlaskaStar threw out his "catalyst" and Hydrogen was produced and sold it off as well as selling off the "fertilizer" so the electrolysis we are trying to do we will need to add hydrogen back to reinstate the orginal.

[thrival]

The problem is AlaskaStar was most probably describing several methods
in his few posts, not just one. Some referred to electrolysis, another would
suggest a purely chemical method as Mako quotes.

AlaskaStar mentioned in one method, a temperature drop. Reading my old
Henley's manual (before freon), there are only two chemicals I know that
do this, one is ammonia, the other sulfuric acid, or alcohol maybe, which
isn't cheap.

I didn't persue the purely chemical method because to me, it's tedious and
messy and not regenerative. Who wants to be changing chemicals over
and over, especially in a large tank capacity? How to control the reaction?
How much retrofitting of stock equipment?

AlaskaStar also mentioned using a box with plates like Chris' & Bob Boyce'
but shorting the plates together, and a microwave method, radiating
chemicals inside a bucket. Clearly these are all different methods,
maybe with similarities of ingredients, maybe not. My personal opinion
is that if the chemicals help us to split water, great. But if we're only
extracting H2 from chemicals, then we need a closed-loop materials cycle
where one ingredient can release H2 and be regenerated by another, and
hopefully take us back where we started. Cars just aren't made big
enough to carry a whole chemical processing factory under the hood.

[BEMET]

[BEMET]

[DavidCrow]

anyone have any simple plans for this???

[WaterFireHO]

Hi Guys

Great job so far !!
I found this just recently and have printed off the Whole thing so I can get up to where your at, (I sure have a lot of reading to do).

Anyhow as to this .......

[quote="thrival"]The problem is AlaskaStar was most probably describing several methods
in his few posts, not just one. Some referred to electrolysis, another would
suggest a purely chemical method as Mako quotes.

If you recall twards the beginning of this AlaskaStar mentioned that he COMBINED 3 DIFFERENT PROCESSES into his unit.

he might have been giving clues as to which part ov each process he was using.

I will report when I get done Reading...

Thanks for all you guys have done so far. I think this process will be Awesome when figured out !!!

Thanks AlaskaStar for pointing us in this direction.

[Ronald_raygun]

[thrival]

Ronald:

But that's the rub you see, I'm not 100% sure that I did figure it out.
Yes, Linnard Griffin shows us that dilute sulfuric acid and metals make H2,
but real question is what happens after that?

Did the H2 come from the H2SO4 (formula for acid) or from splitting
water? Does that leave only SO4 after off-gassing or not? We know the
SO4 will shuttle back and forth between the cells, but will the cell make
more H2 from splitting water? ...or must we regenerate the acid with
a separate electrolysis cell that does split water, but whose efficiency
serves as a limit or a brake that our original idea was supposed to over-
come?

Linnard showed that a small amount of heat from his hotplate was
necessary to accelerate his reaction between acid and iron. Fine; small
electrical current between two cells, in lieu of heat, may serve. The big
question again, surrounds where does further H2 arise after that from
the acid has been stripped away, i.e. how does it regenerate? Yes we
know an electro-potential exists between the metals before reaching
equilibrium and that difference can be restored by reverse charging,
but the production of further gas has not been seen yet, so cautious vs.
full-blown optimism, is in order.

AlaskaStar had a method where simple ingredients were added to a
bucket without any electricity added, and made fertilizer once the reaction
was over. I hope that's a different process than what I "discovered" with
everyone's help here, because changing chemicals after one use is not a
perpetually rechargable cell I thought and still hope we have here.

[owl]

All,

I think that we still need to answer the fundamental question of the chemical reactions. In a previous post, I posed the question as to what the chemical reactions were (see page 22 Thurs. Nov. 03).

I asked if the following chemical reactions were going on:

Charge cycle:
CaSO4 + H2O + voltage ==> CaO + H2SO4

and then
Discharge Cycle
CaO + H2SO4 + voltage turned off ==> CaSO4 + H2 + O

Orange Crusader said "I hope not" and then went on to explain further about the FeO reaction.

In looking back to Aug. 31 (page 10 of this forum), a post by xvr80 spells out what is happening. A post by Orange crusader a short time later verified this reaction, but added the O2 to the right hand side of the equation (see post on Thurs. Sept. 01 bottom of page 10). Now, it seems that we have learned something new, or some assumptions that were made aren't true that we previously thought.

So, is there a chemist out there that can verify what is really happening with this reaction. Does the CaO + H2SO4 reaction produce water or Hydrogen and Oxygen?

Anyone?

[zendog]

Owl-

Yes, I hope a chemist will come to our rescue soon to answer these very basic questions.
From my own simple tests so far using from 4.5 Volts on up to 33 volts DC when you do the CaSO4+H2O+voltage you will make hydrogen gas and Oxygen for sure anyways since you have now placed electrodes into the solution and put a charge to it. I'm starting out with CaSO4+H2O
So am I changing the CaSo4 back to CaO and H2SO4 in the process? good question
I don't know how much power it requires to do so or if it is even possible
And further, if it is doing the desired reaction then it would seem to me that the newly reformed CaO would immediately get attacked by the also newly available H2SO4 in the process. Would be nifty if this was happening.

So far I am encouraged by the amounts of gas produced in this reaction but only when considering the low amperage draw requirements. In other words my tiny fuel cell hasn't produced "copius" amounts of Hydroxy gas(thats bad ) but then it doesn't seem to use a lot of amps either(thats good )So I need to measure carefully the volume of gas produced in a reaction of H2SO4+H2O+dcvoltage compared to the reaction of CaSO4+H2O+dcvoltage Will have to consider also the different if any resistance(ohms) of each solution
Then I reckon that if more gas is produced from charging the solution of CaSo4+H2O when at the same resistance with the same voltage then perhaps the desired reaction we are hoping for is indeed happening.
Would be a lot easier however if a chemist would materialize to sort us all out and then we wouldn't have to fool around unneccessarily with the risks of exploding fuel cells that send shrapnel and hot caustic solution all over oneself and the wife's kitchen

[B0rriska]

I'm messing around with a process of moving a electrolyte through permenent magnetic field lines to disassociate the gas from the water.Basically turning the water into a conductor and moving it through the field lines.I have an article that seams to proove it has been done.We might just have to make it more efficient.If this can be done than I believe the holy grail of H2 production has been found. Even if we have to mechanically move the water around through the field lines. Maybe we could vibrate the water at a low frequency to simulate movement through the field lines. More magnets means higher flux density, hence more current flow and more disassociation. I'll find a way to link the article, but the jist of the process is apparent.We might be able to use this to help with the seperation of the chemicals in the electro-chemical model.I'm excited about this one.
P.S. I read that the magnets lose flux density QUICKER when used to disassociat the water.Sounds wierd but could clue us in to some other process happening.[/img]