Did someone mention "thermodynamics?"

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4235639a6479.html

Fuel from water becoming reality says Kiwi firm

Imagine watering the garden, then turning the hose into your petrol tank and filling up the car.

It has been a holy grail for an age, a water-based fuel. Well, that technology may already be here, claims small Kiwi company Bios Fuel.

But scientists remain sceptical and say an engine running on water defies the laws of physics.

Bios Fuel began with a concept in 1996, as founder Steve Ryan was tinkering with an old motorbike engine in an Auckland garage.

He started to believe that burning the hydrogen contained in water in a combustion engine was not just science fiction.

...

So why isn't this technology already on the shelf?

Mr Ryan says scepticism from the scientific community and the public remains the main barrier to water-fuel technology.

He says there has been more support from the United States, and that is where Bio Fuels will focus its efforts.

"New Zealand will still be the home base, but there's a need to go where the market is."

:patriot:

[hedgehog]

1. Proof positive that Kiwis have a better grasp of physics than Americans! nt

[FiveGoodMen]

2. Rubbish (the article, not your post)

[n2doc]

3. "Burning water" Yeah, that's the ticket!

Why oh why do these idiots persist in such bs?

Frankly, if one wanted to make an engine that ran on easily availabe molecules, an engine that did this:

O2+N2 -> 2NO is thermodynamically favorable and would work. Of course NO is NOT something we want to produce more of (precursr to acid rain and eutrophicating fertilizer) but at least physically, it would work!

[eppur_se_muova]

4. INCREDIBLE LIMITLESS ENERGY SOURCE FROM WATER!!! -- NOT.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=228&topic_id=30674&mesg_id=30687

[Igel]

5. Chuckle-chuckle.

Rather like suggesting that CO2 is a great fuel source ... just think of all the carbon in it that we could burn. Without mining--just suck it out of the air.

[NNadir]

6. In general, things like this are usually reported by people with poor scientific educations.

There are usually about 50 or 60 reports like this in a decade, almost all of them from people at the scientific level of an anti-nuke.

The first and second laws of thermodynamics are not going to respond to a Greenpeace demand for repeal. In fact - and undoubtedly this will come as an enormous surprise to our anti-nuke community - the laws of Thermodyanmics were not passed by Congress and they cannot be repealed, even if a bunch of naked Greenpeace demonstrators climb flagpoles with big banners pasted to their butts.

[pscot]

7. "Skepticism...remains the main barrier"

You got to believe!