Hydrogen Production Breakthrough

[ramset]

Mark E

you forgot...."all things are possible"!

For myself" Prejudice with out investigation" is not an option.

We shall see?

Chet

[mikestocks2006]

If this is real its game over. However i question their claim of getting 1kg of hydrogen out of one liter of water


http://revolution-green.com/hydrogen-production-breakthrough/


Kind Regards
Mark

From: http://revolution-green.com/hydrogen-production-breakthrough/
"SOLAR HYDROGEN TRENDS INC. have claimed to have developed a reactor that with an input of 500 watts,  produces an output of 2,797 cubic feet of hydrogen per hour"

If they can produce any gas at that Volumetric Rate under STP conditions (standard temperature and pressure at the outlet) using 500 Watts, then in effect they demonstrate a 4.4  to 1 direct mechanical theoretical overunity.  Even with 50% overall conversion losses, they should be able to self loop (mechanical <-> electrical) and get more than 1 watt net out for every watt recycled...
Is the demo completed already?

Thanks for posting.
Mike

[lancaIV]

From: http://revolution-green.com/hydrogen-production-breakthrough/
"SOLAR HYDROGEN TRENDS INC. have claimed to have developed a reactor that with an input of 500 watts,  produces an output of 2,797 cubic feet of hydrogen per hour"

If they can produce any gas at that Volumetric Rate under STP conditions (standard temperature and pressure at the outlet) using 500 Watts, then in effect they demonstrate a 4.4  to 1 direct mechanical theoretical overunity.  Even with 50% overall conversion losses, they should be able to self loop (mechanical <-> electrical) and get more than 1 watt net out for every watt recycled...
Is the demo completed already?

Thanks for posting.
Mike

                                                 They claim
             a chemical 440X/electrical 220X amplifying factor not a 4,4 factor !


             221KWh chemical output dividing with 0,5 KWh electrical input !
110KWh converted (50% lost)electrical output dividing with 0,5 KWh electrical input
and with such a factor a partial feedback cycle is ever possible,
                           perpetuum hydrogen plant work concept


                          I.T.E.R.: low budget version

[mikestocks2006]

                                                 They claim
             a chemical 440X/electrical 220X amplifying factor not a 4,4 factor !


             221KWh chemical output dividing with 0,5 KWh electrical input !
110KWh converted (50% lost)electrical output dividing with 0,5 KWh electrical input
and with such a factor a partial feedback cycle is ever possible,
                           perpetuum hydrogen plant work concept


                          I.T.E.R.: low budget version

You've miseread my post - there was no mention of chemical conversion energy output. ONLY theoretcal mechanical.! 

Thanks
Mike

[TinselKoala]

You are quite right, TK. My mistake.

The other thing is that there is no mention in USPTO of solar hydrogen trends, either as inventor, or assignee or as their AANM tag. Nor a response for Agaanyan or Balakiryan.

You didn't make a mistake. Your (2/18) x (start mass) gives the correct mass of the hydrogen in the water. I just did it differently: the ratio of hydrogen to oxygen by atomic weight in water H₂O is 2:16 or 1:8, so water is one part hydrogen and eight parts oxygen, by weight. Same answer as you got.
You have 2/18 parts hydrogen and 16/18 parts oxygen, for a ratio of 2:16 or 1:8, same as me.