Re: Electrolysis is not always ludicrous...

[Don Lancaster]

charliew2 wrote:
> "Mike McWilliams" <michael.mcwilliams@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
> news:1121789164.427596@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > Don W. wrote:
> >
> > > "charliew2" <charliew2@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > news:11do553ed9lfobb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >
> > > > "Don Lancaster" <don@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > > news:3jq52pFqg3jrU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Peter Lowrie wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Dear Mike
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ...Is this to say that sugar contains Hydrogen, how would one go about
> > > > > > extracting Hydrogen from sugar?
> > > > >
> > > > > The energy required to extact the hydrogen would vastly exceed that of
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > >
> > > > > recovered hydrogen.
> > > >
> > > > Not so, Don.  You would burn the synthetic fuel to release its energy.
> > >
> > > If
> > >
> > >
> > > > you used atmospheric CO2 in this process (i.e., there is a strong
> > >
> > > inference
> > >
> > >
> > > > above that the new process would duplicate the way that plants sequester
> > > > atmospheric CO2), there would be no net fossil carbon emissions to the
> > > > environment.
> > >
> > >
> > > You're a smart fellow -- where the heck are you coming from here?  The
> > > energy contained in sugar comes both from hydrogen and carbon. 
> > > Converting
> > > energy from one form to another results in some heat losses.  So how can
> > > you end up with anything close to the energy you started with if you
> > > extract hydrogen from sugar?  What do you mean by "burn the synthetic 
> > > fuel
> > > to release its energy"?
> > >
> > > Don W.
> >
> > The point is you never end up with as much as you started, but something 
> > which follows the way nature does it in my opinion has a higher chance of 
> > success where all methods so far have proven to be expensive. Natural 
> > systems have been using the sun as the dominant energy source for eons, I 
> > would suspect that evolution has come up with some fairly decent 
> > efficiencies, which intelligent humans can hopefully improve on. What I am 
> > hoping for is a manufactured method which imitates natural methods, such 
> > that the energy produced doesn't have to go toward reproduction as in 
> > living systems.
>
>
> That's a pretty tall order, Mike.  Nature uses a LOT of very cute tricks, 
> and a lot of research needs to be done before humans have a chance to 
> improve on the natural processes. 

The key process to be on involves metalloradicals.
See the references in http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf


--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster
Synergetics   3860 West First Street  Box 809  Thatcher, AZ 85552
voice: (928)428-4073 email: don@xxxxxxxxxx

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at                                 www.tinaja.com">http://www.tinaja.com