Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

Poplamp

poplamp

CCTool

CCTool

LEDTVforSale

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

OverUnity Book

overunity principles book

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 490823
  • *Total Topics: 14443
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 207
  • *Total: 208

Facebook

Author Topic: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis  (Read 19249 times)

Offline GeorgeWiseman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #15 on: October 05, 2015, 10:02:13 PM »
Please see the wikipedia article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water

I see in that article that the theoretical 100% efficiency is 11.7MJ/m3
= 3250 watthours/1000 liters or 3.25 watthours per liter of gas produced. 

Thus, any electrolyzer that is producing gas at LESS than 3.25 watthours per liter is over 100% efficient by ‘accepted’ electrolysis laws. 

So an electrolyzer operating at 2.7 watthours per liter of gas would be 120% efficient.  This test was done decades ago on Yull Brown's Australian technology.

My ER 1200 WaterTorches have been independently tested to produce gas at 1.9 watthour per liter of gas, or over 170% efficient. 
My current technology (2015) can produce gas at 0.9 watthour per liter of gas, or over 360% efficient. 

How can that be true?

It can be true because Brown’s Gas is NOT straight diatomic hydrogen and oxygen.  An important ADDITIONAL gas is formed in Brown’s Gas electrolyzers that is NOT formed in traditional electrolyzers.  I call this gas Electrically Expanded Water (ExW).

ExW is the reason for all of BG’s anomalies.  ExW explains the apparent over-unity (more gas being produced than Faraday Laws predict) and both how and why mon-atomic hydrogen and oxygen can exist in BG.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #15 on: October 05, 2015, 10:02:13 PM »

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13522
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #16 on: October 06, 2015, 11:56:09 PM »
Please show us how you are drying the water vapor out of the gas stream before your volume measurements. Also please show us your input power measurement setup.

ExW might "explain" things as you suggest, but what is the actual independent evidence for the production of monoatomic H and O in your electrolysis scheme, and why does _your_ system produce these things when other electrolysis systems do not?


Offline GeorgeWiseman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #17 on: October 07, 2015, 06:20:49 PM »
Please show us how you are drying the water vapor out of the gas stream before your volume measurements. Also please show us your input power measurement setup.

I don't remove the water vapor for two reasons. 
First, because the actual water vapor is an important and useful constituent of Brown's Gas.  It enhances the gas effects. 
Second, because the ExW shows up on spectrographs as water vapor.  The difference is that if you cool the gas, the ExW doesn't condense. 
So I measure the total volume of gas coming out of the electrolyzer, cooled to ambient temperature (25°C) for SATP volume and measured using water displacement method (keeping all pressures ambient).

Quote
ExW might "explain" things as you suggest, but what is the actual independent evidence for the production of monoatomic H and O in your electrolysis scheme, and why does _your_ system produce these things when other electrolysis systems do not?

Every spectrographic test of BG (aka HHO) shows the H and O.  These values aren't high (maybe 3% at best) but they are there... and ignored. 
All electrolyzers make H & O as the water is initially split, but traditional designs 'allow' the H & O to 're-form' into H2 and O2. 
Electrolyzers designed to produce Brown's Gas make the ExW, which allows some of the H & O to remain 'trapped' and stable in the mon-atomic state. 

However, don't get caught up in the mon-atomic H & O debate, it is a side effect of what's really happening. 

I THINK the BG electrolyzers can make the ExW because of the lack of a partition or membrane that traditional electrolyzers use to separate the H2 and O2.  The ExW is formed, in the liquid, exactly in the center between the cell electrodes; I have video of this happening.

There is not enough H & O (or water vapor for that matter) to account for the gas volume being produced by efficient Brown's Gas electrolyzers.  In my opinion, the only thing that can explain the anomalous volume is my theoretical ExW. 

Electrically Expanded Water is water that has expanded into a gaseous form WITHOUT splitting into H & O.  This is then an implosive gas, because it simply reverts to liquid water as it gives up it's electrostatic energy.

Offline verpies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3402
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2015, 09:20:49 AM »
How does the efficiency of H2O electrolysis depend on pressure?


Offline GeorgeWiseman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2015, 05:06:42 PM »
Pressure generally increases the efficiency of electrolysis by keeping the bubbles smaller, thus bubbles offer less resistance to ion flow through the fluid and take up less 'active' surface area on the electrode surfaces, again reducing resistance (also lowering overall cell voltage which increases wattage efficiency). 

However, increasing pressure in a Brown's Gas electrolyzer is dangerous because it is (overall) an explosive gas that can be ignited by static electricity, temperature and pressure.  As pressure rises, the explosive pressure spike rises exponentially... So it is much safer to keep the temperature and pressure low. 
I have video (see my YouTube channel) showing a pop bottle will contain an ambient pressure BG explosion.  I don't have video of my 70 psi test but assure you that it was one of the loudest bangs I've ever heard and I have blasting certification (I've heard a lot of loud bangs).

Another, safer, way to make BG electrolyzers efficient is to pulse the electricity.  This allows the bubbles to clear the plates and offers fresh plate surface for the next pulse.  Plate design also matters, plates that are wide and short clear their bubbles faster than plates that are narrow and tall.  The bubbles formed at the bottom of tall narrow plates interfere with plate function all the way up (stick to the plates for a much longer time).

In conclusion, as many experiments have shown, pressure is not needed to make the BG electrolyzers efficient and having high pressure is dangerous (we do NOT store the gas in cylinders, it's produced on-demand).

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2015, 05:06:42 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #20 on: February 05, 2016, 10:29:20 PM »
( This is a topic I know almost nothing about,  so I don't know the correct units for measuring electricity and hydrogen in this topic  )

First,

 - Say you use 5-units of electricity for 1 minute,  to produce 1/2-litre of hydrogen

 - Then, you use the absolute smallest spark possible to ignite the 1/2-litre of hydrogen

 - NOW,   if it was possible to use the energy from the explosion of the 1/2-litre of hydrogen,   to produce 'More' than  1/2-litre of hydrogen( via any method ),  then you could achieve overunity .

----------------

      So,  to use the explosion of the 1/2-litre of hydrogen to try and produce 'More'  than 1/2-litre of hydrogen,  here are 2 possible methods :
       -   I recently read that they have invented a camera that just uses the energy received by it's image sensor,  to power the whole camera,  and also,   extremely sensitive infrared-cameras have  existed for a some time.  So,  could an explosion chamber lined with these materials, convert enough of the energy from the explosion, into electricity,  remembering that heat is mostly in the infrared range
( I'm assuming that part of the electromagnetic wavelengths( frequency ) of the explosion,  could not be converted to electricity by these image-sensor materials,  and I don't know the electromagnetic frequency ranges of solar cells  )

       -  Or,  could you use the burning/exploding hydrogen,  rising( floating)  up through another container of water,  to generate more hydrogen( or other some other usefull gas ),  this is an idea I cannot expand upon,  since I know nothing about chemistry .
« Last Edit: February 06, 2016, 01:41:00 AM by guest1289 »

Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #21 on: February 05, 2016, 11:27:00 PM »
Other than using graphene,  or the latest inventions of the very ultralight foams and gels ( made of metals ) to produce the tiny current to produce hydrogen through electrolysis,   I always had the idea of the old photo-etched semiconductor chip processes,  that one of those old memory chips,  could( possibly without having all it's coatings ) provide enough electrical contacts per square-mm to increase the efficiency of  electrolysis,  and you could put these plates facing each other .

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #21 on: February 05, 2016, 11:27:00 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline pomodoro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 717
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #22 on: February 06, 2016, 01:18:40 AM »
Burning to make electricity in any known way is not efficient. A fuel cell might be better. Platinized platinum is one of the better electrodes as it has a low over potential. Look up different materials for their hydrogen and oxygen overpotentials. As far as browns gas being special, don't believe it. Monoatomic oxygen and hydrogen are unstable. They would quickly recombine to form diatomic molecules especially on metallic surface spontaneously. In doing so a large amount of heat would be given out. This has not been shown to occur.

Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #23 on: February 06, 2016, 02:13:01 AM »
I know very little about electrolysis and chemistry .

Yes, logically,  the more solid-state that a device is,  or more like a chemical-battery it is,  then it should be more efficient .

That made me realize, that molds/plants/insects etc must be very efficient in some ways.  I assume overunity cannot exist,  but I wonder how close to overunity nature can get .

Maybe copying living things could produce the most efficient batteries or generators

Offline LibreEnergia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 333
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #24 on: February 06, 2016, 11:57:38 PM »
The wikipedia article quotes the efficiency as MJ per cubic metre of HYDROGEN ,not the volume of the evolved gases. You'll  discover there is no overunity using your claimed figures.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #24 on: February 06, 2016, 11:57:38 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline forumblog

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #25 on: February 07, 2016, 03:13:45 AM »
My apologies, I am  guest1289  using another account for something

In the two posts on this page I typed -
Quote
( This is a topic I know almost nothing about,  so I don't know the correct units for measuring electricity and hydrogen in this topic  )

Quote
I know very little about electrolysis and chemistry .

I made an understatement,  I know almost nothing about measuring electricity, and even less about chemistry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water#Efficiency   says
"Efficiency of modern hydrogen generators is measured by power consumed per standard volume of hydrogen (MJ/m3), assuming standard temperature and pressure of the H2."   
   
    In the idea I posted,  I just assumed I was describing the idea ,  "per standard volume of hydrogen", "assuming standard temperature and pressure of the H2",  to correctly compare inputs and outputs( performance ).  I was thinking in terms of inputs and outputs, being measured in the correct ways, for  comparison .

You typed
Quote
The wikipedia article quotes the efficiency as MJ per cubic metre of HYDROGEN ,not the volume of the evolved gases
Then I will try and think of the idea I posted in terms of   "MJ per cubic metre of HYDROGEN" .

But now,  that reminds me of an even more basic question related to this,  that I am not completely sure about, that is the following  :

Is it totally 100% accurate to say that  -
 [ the energy required to separate hydrogen from oxygen in water ]  = [ the energy required to fuse hydrogen and oxygen back together to form water ]

Here is  one  reason I question that -
    -  Imagine you have 2 magnets floating nearby each other,  and then you give one magnet the slightest-push( using the absolute minimum energy ) required for the 2 magnets to join together
    -  Now, using the absolute minimum energy,  separate those two magnets to the distance they were before
          I doubt that the energy required to separate the 2 magnets,  will equal the energy required to join them.
       
    Yes,   I know the process by which atoms join together,  and separate,  must be very different to permanent-magnets,      maybe they are more similar to the types of buttons on jackets that snap-together,  but even in that type of idea,  I am still not totally convinced that it is absolutely 100% accurate to state that :
 [ the energy required to separate hydrogen from oxygen in water ]  = [ the energy required to fuse hydrogen and oxygen back together to form water ]






Offline LibreEnergia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 333
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #26 on: February 07, 2016, 08:08:07 AM »

Is it totally 100% accurate to say that  -
 [ the energy required to separate hydrogen from oxygen in water ]  = [ the energy required to fuse hydrogen and oxygen back together to form water ]

Here is  one  reason I question that -
    -  Imagine you have 2 magnets floating nearby each other,  and then you give one magnet the slightest-push( using the absolute minimum energy ) required for the 2 magnets to join together
    -  Now, using the absolute minimum energy,  separate those two magnets to the distance they were before
          I doubt that the energy required to separate the 2 magnets,  will equal the energy required to join them.
       
    Yes,   I know the process by which atoms join together,  and separate,  must be very different to permanent-magnets,      maybe they are more similar to the types of buttons on jackets that snap-together,  but even in that type of idea,  I am still not totally convinced that it is absolutely 100% accurate to state that :
 [ the energy required to separate hydrogen from oxygen in water ]  = [ the energy required to fuse hydrogen and oxygen back together to form water ]

The analogy you give with the magnets is erroneous. It takes no energy to hold two magnets apart for any length of time. You cannot make a comparison between the energy required to 'unlock' the holding mechanism to start the magnet moving and then compare that to the energy required to separate them again and come to any meaningful conclusion.

A meaningful analogy would be to measure the work done to separate two magnets by a certain distance then measure the work that can be recovered by allowing them to move back to the original displacements. In all cases you will discover that the amount of energy recoverable is the same or less than the amount of energy required to separate them.

Exactly the same situation occurs in chemical reactions such as hydrolysis.


Offline forumblog

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #27 on: February 07, 2016, 04:20:18 PM »
Quote
A meaningful analogy would be to measure the work done to separate two magnets by a certain distance then measure the work that can be recovered by allowing them to move back to the original displacements. In all cases you will discover that the amount of energy recoverable is the same or less than the amount of energy required to separate them.

Exactly the same situation occurs in chemical reactions such as hydrolysis.

    Yes,  the reason  that the  'energy recoverable from joining the magnets, could be less,  than the energy it took to separate them' ,  is because of losses in the process.   
    So if you just ignite the entire amount of hydrogen in the device in one go,  some of that energy will escape outside of the device in various frequencies of electromagnetic radiation .

   At first,  I thought that what you have typed proves the comparison example that  I made  with the magnets,  I typed 
Quote
I doubt that the energy required to separate the 2 magnets,  will equal the energy required to join them.
,   but I forgot about losses in the system .

    But, in the example I made with the magnets,  I am referring to a purely hypothetical device,  with no losses in the system,   
Quote
I doubt that the energy required to separate the 2 magnets,  will equal the energy required to join them.

    In a  'purely-hypothetical'  device,  with  'no losses'  in the system,
       -  use 100-Mj to create 100-ml of hydrogen, 
       -  then use .01-Mj to spark the hydrogen,    would it be  100% accurate to say that the maximum energy you could recover is 100-mj,   and also,   since there are  'no-losses'  in this hypothetical device,  could or would your recover less than  100-Mj .

     It's exactly that type of possible inequality,  that I was thinking could be exploited to try and design an overunity device,   basically,  I'm wondering if you could gain that  overunity-energy  by  igniting the full amount of  separated  hydrogen all  in one go,  using the tiniest spark possible .
    I'm wondering if that  single combustion of the full amount of hydrogen,   could produce more energy,  than it took to produce that very same amount of hydrogen .

    I think the concept I am trying to put forward, will become a bit too confusing for me, and there was another way that of was thinking of explaining it,  that I can't remember now .

   But you have answered the question anyway, especially since a totally-loss-less device cannot actually exist

Offline GeorgeWiseman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #28 on: February 07, 2016, 08:41:09 PM »
As far as browns gas being special, don't believe it. Monoatomic oxygen and hydrogen are unstable. They would quickly recombine to form diatomic molecules especially on metallic surface spontaneously. In doing so a large amount of heat would be given out. This has not been shown to occur.
It is true that mon-atomic hydrogen and oxygen normally devolve into their diatomic forms quickly and spontaneously (not requiring a catalyst like hydrogen peroxide would). 
That's WHY Brown's Gas is special because it DOES contain a measurable and stable volume of mon-atomic hydrogen and oxygen.  I have spectrographic charts (independently tested) to show this.  I'm putting together a document to share all this data.
I do not know exactly why the mon-atomic gasses are stable, but suspect it is because of the electrically expanded water (ExW) that is generated in BG electrolyzers.  ExW is NOT generated in 'normal' electrolyzers that separate the oxygen and hydrogen.  ExW seems to hold the mon-atomic constituents in a 'matrix' so that do not touch each other and combine into their di-atomic forms.


Offline guest1289

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 321
    • The download link for the document containing my 'Inventions and Designs'
Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #29 on: February 08, 2016, 02:55:13 AM »
( I know nothing about chemistry,  and very little about electricity )

   In my idea,  of a  'purely-hypothetical'  device,  with  'no energy losses in the system( no energy leaving the device )'

       -  First,  use  100-Mj  to create 100-ml of hydrogen, 
       -  Then,  use .001-Mj to spark the 100-ml of hydrogen,

    My idea is to either : 
       -  use the energy recovered from the combustion of the 100-ml of hydrogen( maximum recovery of energy ),
       -  or,  use the burning cloud of the 100-ml-of-hydrogen( maybe rising up through another level of water )
            To  'Create'  'More Than'  100-ml-of-hydrogen.

            So, obviously, repeating that in each cycle,  would mean that you would be constantly creating more and more  hydrogen,  in each cycle.

    (  I know nothing about what is created by a burning cloud of hydrogen,  rising up through water , it's just a random idea )

    (  The idea that you are constantly creating more and more hydrogen,  would overcome any energy-losses  in a real device  )

        (  I assume people almost 200 years ago,  probably had the same idea as me,  indicating it is not possible  )

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Theoretical efficiency of electrolysis
« Reply #29 on: February 08, 2016, 02:55:13 AM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: