Scientist burns water

[edhopper]

Source: Yahoo/AP

An Erie cancer researcher has found a way to burn salt water, a novel invention that is being touted by one chemist as the "most remarkable" water science discovery in a century.

John Kanzius happened upon the discovery accidentally when he tried to desalinate seawater with a radio-frequency generator he developed to treat cancer. He discovered that as long as the salt water was exposed to the radio frequencies, it would burn.



Read more: http://green.yahoo.com/index.php?q=node/1570

---

Wow, very cool! And I thought driving a car with sea water was an urban myth.

[ThoughtCriminal]

1. There may be a catch

Not mentioned in the article. How much enrgy did the radio-frequency generator consume compared to the chemical reaction in the water?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. good point, my question, too.

but 3000 degrees is rather high.

[Submariner]

2. If we survive as a civilization it will be the nerds that save us

[warrior1]

3. My roommate

use to do that all the time. Leave a pot of water on the stove and forget about it.

[Joanne98]

4. Don't tell the Pentagon, they'll set the ocean on fire!

[Kolesar]

22. That's just ... out there

:lol:

[EST]

5. That's great--

what did he "burn" it to? Burning is nothing more than a fairly rapid exothermic chemical reaction,
If water were "burned," it would have to react with oxygen and become a different chemical. H₂O cannot become H₂O₂ by this process, as that particular chemical is pretty anxious to get rid of that extra oxygen and, left to its own devices, will "decay" of its own accord, even faster with heat applied.

By the way, exploding gunpowder and rusting iron are both forms of burning.

Whatever this rascal has discovered of claims to have discovered, that ain't it.

[tularetom]

7. How much power does it take to run the raido frequency generator?

And is that more than the energy that's created from the burning sea water?

Check out the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

[truthisfreedom]

10. It's not completely inconceivable that the burning water's heat output could be high enough to both

sustain the RF field and also have byproduct heat. It's just very very unlikely.

[ret5hd]

14. You believe a perpetual motion machine is possible???

[Throckmorton]

26. Huh?

How is this a perpetual motion machine?

[kenfrequed]

8. hmm

So the salt must somehow be acting on the surrounding water?

His original idea was using metal particles in the body that react differently to tumors. Is it the salt or sodium that is somehow transmitting this energy into the water around it???

How does it work????

[bemildred]

9. This will not produce any net energy. nt

[EndElectoral]

11. How do you put the fire out?

[pscot]

12. Bad Scientist, bad

n/t

[bhikkhu]

13. Next up - pentagon asks for funding for water weapons research

So we can set the ocean on fire. How about setting clouds on fire, or rain or fog, or just get right to the point and ignite the water content in a human body? The future is so bright.....

[valerief]

15. HAARP will be burning up NOLA next. nt

[MannyGoldstein]

16. Perhaps This Explains "Cold Fusion"? (nt)

[Xipe Totec]

17. Did you bother to check Snopes?

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?p=320311

[lfairban]

18. This is nothing new.

They were doing this in Cleveland decades ago. Once, the river caught fire.

[Kolesar]

20. Twice, actually

The first time was ages ago.

[losthills]

19. My ex-wife

figured that out a long time ago....

[IDemo]

21. This will go well with my new invention

[eppur_se_muova]

23. BS. Water cannot burn. H2O is the ASH from burning anything containing hydrogen.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1787786&mesg_id=1788066

[AntiFascist]

24. But its also recyclable...

if you pass an electric current through salt water then you produce hydrogen at one electrode and oxygen at the other (electrolysis). Hydrogen is particularly combustable in the presence of pure oxygen. Imagine sticking large turbine generators in a powerful ocean current, how much hydrogen could be produced?

[eppur_se_muova]

25. This works with ordinary water, has been known for over two centuries.

The energy you get from burning the H2 is LESS than the electricity consumed. See the links in my post, or wiki "electrolysis of water".

[AntiFascist]

27. It takes energy to refine gasoline also....

the point is you can generate hydrogen you could make use of the electricity directly.

[eppur_se_muova]

28. Yes, that has been known and understood for a very long time.

The difference with petroleum is that petroleum is energy-rich, straight from the ground. There are no hydrogen mines. H2 is perfectly good as a "medium of exchange" -- energy of just about any form can be used to make H2, and vice versa -- but you don't get any free energy.

And the method describe in the OP is no improvement over straight old-fashioned electrolysis.

[AntiFascist]

29. I understand that it has been known for long time, but it has never been developed...

on a large scale. The fact that it requires energy to produce hydrogen is not the issue. The proposed source of energy would be to sink a turbine generator into an ocean current generating electricity. Once the generator is installed, you also have a source of "free" energy, less the cost of maintaining the generator. You also have the benefit of not ever depleting the source, or having to search to find new oil fields.

You could run miles of cable along the ocean floor to transfer the electrical energy to land, or you could produce hydrogen right there utilizing the salt water. I realize there are also problems transporting hydrogen (liquid or gas) efficiently, but these could probably be solved with enough effort.

I'm not trying to argue support for the method described in the OP, I'm merely pointing out that a related, older method (electrolysis) might work even better