A gentleman from Erie named John Kanzius made a somewhat "shocking" discovery while he was working on a radio-wave generator he had developed for the treatment of cancer. While attempting to desalinate sea water using radio frequencies, he noticed flashes, and within a few days, had saltwater burning in a test-tube as if it were a candle. The discovery spawned interest from the scientific community, mostly concerned with whether or not the water could be used as a fuel, and of course, healthy doses of disbelief. Last week, a Penn State University chemist named Rustum Roy held a demonstration proving that the science is sound, noting that the water doesn't burn, though the radio frequencies weaken the bonds holding together the salt, releasing hydrogen which is ignited when exposed to the RF field. Mr. Kanzius and Dr. Roy say the question now is the efficiency of the energy, and are presenting the technology to the US Department of Defense and Department of Energy to investigate how useful the technology will be. Of the plentiful maybe-fuel (which apparently burns so hot it can melt test-tubes) Dr. Roy says, "This is the most abundant element in the world. It is everywhere," and (without recognition of the poetic irony, as far as we can tell), "Seeing it burn gives me chills." Check the TV report after the break to see the water in action.
[Thanks, Paul]
posted September 11th 2007 2:02PM
you are forgetting and over-simplifying.
the process does add energy, an engine system is a very messy complex equation and depends on alot of stuff. and you do loose alot of stuff in the process of using this system but then you just add more water... add more energy... a few hundred kw of solar.. or a battery. once the process is started this is not a problem. and water is alot cheaper than gas.
How can you people be so stupid? This person has not invented a new fuel source. He's invented a dual purpose converter. It:
1. Converts RF waves into heat.
2. Converts idiots into babbling idiots.
High school knowledge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics
Umm...I wonder if anyone has thought of the other implications of this discovery, perhaps the reason why the guy got chills from watching it: if radio waves can essentially make saltwater combustible, a future of ever increasing radio frequencies in use could possibly lead to a somewhat dangerous situation. Well, that's my input here, the apocalyptic option.
Energy debate aside (and I'm certainly not qualified to comment on the science behind all this), if these are just radio waves, and if these radio waves make the salt water combustible, what does that mean for the water in our bodies? Do we have similar salts in us?
Perhaps a scientist can help me understand why this wouldn't make US combustible... (assuming it works, and ignoring how much energy is required to make it work)?
Jake wrote:
"Energy debate aside (and I'm certainly not qualified to comment on the science behind all this), if these are just radio waves, and if these radio waves make the salt water combustible, what does that mean for the water in our bodies? Do we have similar salts in us?
Perhaps a scientist can help me understand why this wouldn't make US combustible... (assuming it works, and ignoring how much energy is required to make it work)?"
The water is not being "burned". Rather, it is supposedly being broken down into the molecular form of it's component elements, hydrogen and oxygen, which are being "burned" to form water.
Personally, I'm skeptical that this is what it seems. But even if it is what it seems (i.e. low temperature thermolysis of water) realize that it requires high energy RF fields of particular frequencies - not something you're likely to encounter. Think of it this way: Your microwave oven would certainly cook YOU by heating the water in your body IF you were inside of it. But simple safeguards make that almost impossible. The same would certainly be true in this case.
Every green leaf plant, trees, algae, corn, saw grass, sugar cane, sugar beats, etc. uses chlorphyll and sunlight to convert the sunlight to cellulose, carbohydrates, and with heat and pressure we get coal, oil, natural gas, ethanol, etc. which can be later combined with oxygen to produce heat energy to make electricity, hydrogen, ethanol, gasoline, etc. I believe the RF heat energy (fossil fuel electricity) used here is far greater then the heat energy being released by the released burning hydrogen. Summing, might be useful as a way to create storable hydrogen, but it doesn't eliminate fossil fuel requirement, thus really doesn't solve our major problem....the problem being we are going to use up in 300 years or so, what the sun stored in plants over a million years. I suspect the only immediate answer for our modern high energy intensive life styles is nuclear. But we can't go that route because Hollywood didn't like 3 mile island and Joe Public only understands what he is fed by Hollywood / Corporate Advertising / Madison Avenue and misinformed non science trained media journalists/reporters. Some days I find watching some of our party actors in congress on C-Span, more entertaining and at times depressing, vs watching Seinfeld / situation comedies. So goes our world........Yeah, maybe Greenspan etc, have it right, more and better education for all in the world is the best most effective effecient answer, to raising everyones standard of living and solving the worldwide global trade, economic / oil / global warming, etc. problems.......So.....everybody, its great to be curious, lets do it more often and more formally in school, etc. etc. Whoops, slipped off my soap box, you lucky guys/gals.....
It's good to see SOME skeptical minds on this website once in a while...
Too bad you all beat me to it. Hooray for critical thinking!
I usually don't view the comments much, but wow I can't believe the amount of credulity here! I figured a gadget oriented site would be a lot smarter.
Everybody is like thermodynamics this and that. We know the laws.
Technically if we found a way to break water up using a small solar panel then the same energy would be used because the sun had to be formed some how.
The big thing is the amount of energy that he put into making the waves smaller then what came nout of the reaction.
We know the laws of thermo dynamics. Technically solar and wind power have more energy to create the wind and sun then what we get out of them.
We need to know if more power is generated from the reaction then what was generated by gas,coal,wind,solar or whatever else was used to generate the electricity to power the rf generator.
I know this probably doesnt read right but I am not the best at righting out whats in my head (lol)
While some people are thinking about how it will change things, some of us are taking advantage of the Idea and changing stuff.
I jus hope this guy doesnt sell it 2 some big oil company.
The article is not well written. Salt water is a solution of sodium chloride in water. It is important to remember that there are two distinct chemical compounds, sodium chloride and water, present. But these compounds are very different. Sodium chloride is an ionic compound composed of sodium cations and chloride anions held together electrostaticly. In water, the ion pair is broken up by the water molecules which is why salt dissolves in water. So when the reporter says "the radio frequencies weaken the bonds holding together the salt" he's completely wrong as the ions aren't bonded to each other water to begin with. Instead, the bonds being broken are those of the water molecules.
The interaction between water and RF fields is hardly a newly discovered phenomenon. Water absorbs energy from RF fields of suitable frequencies. It's the principle behind such common technologies as microwave ovens and MRI medical imagers. The addition of salt (or any other ions) enhances the efficiency at which the energy is absorbed. The salt is not acting as a true catalyst in this process as it not participating in the reaction.
Speaking of the reaction, the reaction for the conversion of water to hydrogen and oxygen is:
2 H2O -> 2 H2 + O2
For this process to occur, energy must be supplied. Traditionally, this has been in the form of electricity (and salt ions are then needed to allow the water to conduct current) but it is possible to add the energy thermally as well. The trick in the latter case is that the boiling point of water is far lower then the temperature required to break the bonds in the water molecules so the energy must be added to water that can't boil (i.e. under high pressure or superheated steam).
Is it possible that Mr. Kanzius has discovered a new way to break down water into molecular hydrogen and oxygen. Yes - but I am fairly skeptical and would like to see many more experiments by a wider group of scientists.
Not claiming to be a scientist or anything but when was the last time you saw a radio wave be used to power a piston? Pretty kewl stuff. Great way to convert one thing (that does a,b,c stuff) into another (that does x,y,z stuff).
I just put salt water I got from the bay this evening in the microwave for an hour and NOTHING!
What a load of crap
I think saying "Big Oil will buy this and bury it" is kind of short-sighted... Technically you should say "Big ENERGY". Everyone loves to think longingly about alternative fuels of the future, but are you going to grow them yourself in the backyard? Build a water-hydrogen separator in the basement? Probably not.
People have become far lazier than the olden days of self-sustaining farms and the like. The idea of "free energy" without work or cost is nice but just not realistic. Thus, whatever we're using, whenever, some big company will be harvesting, distributing, and selling it to us at a profit. Be it crushed moon rocks, oil, processed salt water or really expensive solar panels.
Still, this is cool. A lot of the best inventions came about because of mistakes or as the result of completely unrelated research!
None of this is new. Stanley Meyer, a guy that was running his car on water, as far as I know using similar technology, did this years ago, filed for patents and ended up being killed.
I am glad to see this is being taken a little more serious this time around.
Yes, salt water born gas is knowen for decades, by the names Brown-Gas, Rhodes-Gas, Bingo Fuel, Aqua Fuel, Magna Fuel etc. Each invention used different methods, but by grossly using high voltage low current combination between two electrodes. Having Radio frequency on Salt Water is kinda first time, and "may" have efficiency benefits in terms of input power to generate gas.
Lets see how this progress...
lol... worse case scenario it can be used as a maritime weapon... set fire to the water underneath the enemy's boat!
If we did start to use this as a fuel source, we'd have to import mass quantities of salt water from overseas. Not to mention convincing OWEC (Orgainzation of Water Exporting Countries) to ramp up production. "Premium salt water from the dead sea."
even though this process will likely be inefficient it may still have use as an energy storage medium. We have a power station here in california with two lakes. power is generated during the peak hours by running water through the turbines from the upper lake to the lower lake. during off peak times the water is pumped back uphill for use during the peak consumption times the following day. mabee we can use the hydrogen to store energy collected from other renewable forms of production even if the efficiency is low
Must everything be seen as a threat against "big oil"? The ubiquity of salt water may not be the relevant factor. It may be discovered that it's more suited to heating homes than running cars, or as a new heat source for cooking food. It doesn't have to be the next big thing in order to have value.
Well...there goes the rest of the world. As if we were not depleting the earth of its natural resources enough. Another discovery that will soon enough wipe out the most abundant resource we have, water. Just because its abundant, doesn't mean its going to last forever.
Something looks fishy here. Hydrogen burns with a blue flame so it cannon be Hydrogen. The flame looks yellowish and that may possibly be Sodium. This also make logical sense because of presence of NaCl in sea water. This should also be accompanied by release of Chlorine gas. I am interested in finding out what is the reddish-orange smoke coming out.
See my comments on page 4 or refer to discussion at depletedcranium.com (not my site)
For starters, nobody mentions how much energy is put into this system and how much is put out from it.
Second, this "scientist" said saltwater is the most abundant element on Earth? Wrong on two points: water is a compound, not an element; and iron is the most abundant element on Earth (by mass). You'd think a scientist would know these things.
Third, burning at 15,000 centigrade? Three times the temperature of the surface of the Sun? I highly doubt it.
This whole things smells fishy. In physics there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. You may not be able to figure out anything about complex physics, but you can surely grasp that.
And it's the Law.
"It's the law."
I say hooray for skepticism and critical thinking, too, just not the limited kind that doesn't include being skeptical of our skepticism. As I see it, all-embracing skepticism not only means that we should pay due repsect to existing laws, but we should also realize that our understanding of said laws just may (well, frankly, it probably will) change upon further examination, or, alas, sometimes via accidents.
Such seems to be the nature of reality, maybe even a scientific law, and that's exactly why the scientific observations and the laws that arose from them in the past (i.e., the sun revolves around the earth--or, gee, it sure looks taht way from where I sit) have so often been proven invalid (if not laughable) or simply incomplete, and thus they are improved upon today.
Now, I don't need to repeat here the litany of well-founded reasons why salt-based fuel can't or won't work, and it's not my intent to proclaim myself as a true believer. Instead, personally, and for the time being, I'll simply bear in mind that all of these objections and conjectures are based on today's best science and.or today's biggest hopes, all of which I expect to be supplanted by tomorrow's better science (if not by this discovery, then by others), or tomorrow's biggest fears (my God! Deslaination is causing global cooling!).
To that end, I'll hold out a bit of hope that this discovery eventually amounts to something good, and not just tomorrow, but TOMORROW.
I'd also like to add that all but a few of the posts here seem to emphasize a key point, namely, that the value of this discovery does NOT depend solely upon its potential as a perpetual motion machine, but rather, it's contingent upon a number of seemingly positive outcomes, including:
1) It simply provides a better/more efficient ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE (i.e., it beats, or simply comes close to "tying" oil, whose cost is likely to rise in the near future--or so we currently have every reason to believe);
2) It simply provides a better/more efficient ALTERNATIVE FORM OF DESALINATION. If it truly were to prove to be significantly better method, that would be absolutely huge, or is nobody here aware of the existing water shortages in the world, and the growing cost of producing desalinated water, all of which is likely to rise in the near future--or so we have currently have every reason to believe.
3) It in some way contributes to our understanding of BASIC SCIENCE. On this score, while it might be the case that similar forms/methods of energy production have been attempted or achieved in the past (i.e., see Brown Gas), there is every reason to believe that this new discovery employs a fairly new method (or at least ne frequency settings). Okay, so aybe it's pure luck that the guy set the right frequency, but whatever the case, he seems to have done something that has never been done in quite the same way--something that might not deserve jaw-dropping attention from the scientific community, but something that certainly appears to merit further exploration.
Moreover, lest we all get our knickers in knots, rest assured, this claim will be explored further. Sorry, conspiracy theorists, but the nature of this experiment is too darned simple not to be tried elsewhere. Plus, I would guess that already there are far too many people to kill off who know the magical code frequency .
Anyway, as a note to the conspiracy crowd, for the record, yes, I'm skeptical enough to believe that the government and oil companies can be villainous, even, well, conspiratorial. However, again, in this particular instance, the genie is too darned basic to be kept in the bottle. I mean, even if "they" killed off the people who currently know
"the code," how would they stop other countries (Iran, for one, comes to mind) from carrying out this work?
I mean, for God's sake, this guy did it in his garage!
In any case, as one final point, I'd like to add what I consider to be the ultimate dose of "healthy" skpticism, and it's this: Let's suppose that this genie does grant us our wish--that is, virtually free fuel from a virtually unlimited (at least while there's a supply of salt water left) perpetual motion device.
Will that cure all of our ills?
Hardly. In fact, I'd like to know of a single invention or scientific discovery that has left the world any less ambiguous than it was before that invention/discovery?
Now, please, save your breath if you plan to accuse me of being overly pessimistic or anti-knowledge. First, I'm certainly not suggesting that science and technology are bad--just ambiguous. In the end, all of our inventions and discoveries seem to give rise to as many new problems as they solve.
Just the same, I'm altogether in favor of pursuing every last thing we can know (while bearing in mind we know so little), and by the way, for me, this pursuit of knowledge should include the knowledge (and hopefully even wisdom) of what science does to us and means to us.
Menawhile, no, I'm not about to junk my car or pretend that Newton and his laws never existed. Quite the opposite. I say say we've all got to face and embrace them, but do so fully, and that means far more than chasing down causes and effects in a lab.
At the very least, it means bearing in mind that we should always watch what we wish for, and then what we get, ad of course, how we use it. If (a MASSIVE IF) we're acting from the better parts of ourselves, just maybe we'll crack the cosmic egg of ambiguity. That's one law that I'd love to see broken in exchange for something better.
it works, its safe, and it is OTC equipment. so who really cares!!
1500K
It reminds me of that Flaming Moe drink from The Simpson's. Just remember to blow out the flame before you drink the salt water.
Or it may become some sort of a incinerating death ray if the radio wave goes through someone who just finished 5 bags of Lays, salt and vinegar flavor of course.
Last night I spent the evening working out a conversion kit for my lawnmower based on the diagrams circulatingm, the engine is not an issue Hydrogen engines are OTS long ago. the fuel is distilled water, with a ratio of 1 cup of salt per gallon. if you use the 3 gallon water jugs from cosco and a level sensor, a few plumbing implements and then wrap the bottle with an antela system like a microwave (tear out the card from an old microwave or purchase one from sears parts) use a screw driver and change the frequency to 14.8 MHZ and do a quick power adapter from 12v(lawnmower)to 9V I am wrapping the bottle with a protective shielding for leakage of signal.
you kick off the process by turning on the power, imedaitely the bottle starts spraying H. you feed it in the engine and kick it over.
The power in the battery will kick off the process and once the engine is running the generator/alternator will keep the battery charged.
Check it out this works!!!!
I am working on an old honda civic next see if I can make a gas tank(plastic) into a useable H tank.
oops, almost forgot, I used a baloon for the resivour for the extra H you do not use and it lets you do a little throttling without worring about back pressure. still have some control issue I need to work out. tieing them into the throttle some how :-)
I remember the story, back then there was no internet. This time the information how to use this is already common knowledge. you cant patent common knowledge.
To doboy -Stan Meyers was a con-man! He would only demostarte the device in his home lab. He was Scheduled to meet with electrical engineering professors at Queen Mary, University of London to proved it worked,when it came time, he made excuses and never showed up. He was selling the rights to market his so called water engine to investors for $25,000 each but never delivered a single engine or proved that it worked! After years of not getting answers,proof,a working engine or independent studies, etc, the investors sued...Meyers device was examined by 3 different experts in court and they all concluded it was just a simple electrolysis device.He was convicted of fraud and ordered to pay back the money he stole from investors.
He was not poisoned.. An autopsy report by Franklin County coroner William R. Adrion showed the cause of death to be a cerebral aneurysm.
Now to the saltwater... what you conspiracy whacko,s arent paying attention to is that he must use elecricity to produce the radio waves in order to extract the hydrogen......I think maybe you should all pay attention to Jason ..he seems to be the smartest guy on here.