Suppressed Free Energy Technology for Home Use

On 9 Apr 2004 10:14:58 -0700, (lensman1955) wrote:

* wrote in message . ..
Building rockets is a futile attempt at space travel. All they're going
to
do is blow people up.

It's only safe and practical application is in a fuel cell to generate
electricity for home use. But leave it to the defense contractors to try
to
capitalize on science for profit.


I'm wondering what wonderful method you would propose for getting into space
without rockets?

My point is that it has potential serious dangers for fuel cell use also--at
least as dangerous as gasoline/petrol, which should not be stored in a home.

Riiiiiight. Batteries (fuel cells) aren't safe, right?

Batteries are not hydrogen peroxide based, I believe.

The current batteries which are on the market are not, that's true.

Comparing the
two would be like comparing a child's paper cap with an M-80 because
they both have gunpowder in them!

Fuel cells are a type of battery.

On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 08:41:53 -0600, "Jay Windley"
wrote:

Because when "*" reads that hydrogen peroxide can potentially be made from
water, he believes the transition from H2O to H2O2 is then somehow a trivial
process. Since H2O2 is shown to liberate great quantities of energy when it
decomposes back into oxygen and water, he believes it constitutes a
suppressed form of free energy. Of course whether the energy is free or not
depends on how much energy is required to create the hydrogen peroxide in
the first place.

No the point is it would free the world of oil dependance.

* wrote in message . ..
On 9 Apr 2004 10:14:58 -0700, (lensman1955) wrote:

* wrote in message . ..
Building rockets is a futile attempt at space travel. All they're going
to
do is blow people up.

It's only safe and practical application is in a fuel cell to generate
electricity for home use. But leave it to the defense contractors to try
to
capitalize on science for profit.


I'm wondering what wonderful method you would propose for getting into space
without rockets?

My point is that it has potential serious dangers for fuel cell use also--at
least as dangerous as gasoline/petrol, which should not be stored in a home.

Riiiiiight. Batteries (fuel cells) aren't safe, right?

Batteries are not hydrogen peroxide based, I believe.

The current batteries which are on the market are not, that's true.

Comparing the
two would be like comparing a child's paper cap with an M-80 because
they both have gunpowder in them!

Fuel cells are a type of battery.

But they're not a stable for home-use type of battery.

On 10 Apr 2004 22:14:52 -0700, (lensman1955) wrote:

* wrote in message . ..
On 9 Apr 2004 10:14:58 -0700, (lensman1955) wrote:

* wrote in message . ..
Building rockets is a futile attempt at space travel. All they're going
to
do is blow people up.

It's only safe and practical application is in a fuel cell to generate
electricity for home use. But leave it to the defense contractors to try
to
capitalize on science for profit.


I'm wondering what wonderful method you would propose for getting into space
without rockets?

My point is that it has potential serious dangers for fuel cell use also--at
least as dangerous as gasoline/petrol, which should not be stored in a home.

Riiiiiight. Batteries (fuel cells) aren't safe, right?

Batteries are not hydrogen peroxide based, I believe.

The current batteries which are on the market are not, that's true.

Comparing the
two would be like comparing a child's paper cap with an M-80 because
they both have gunpowder in them!

Fuel cells are a type of battery.

But they're not a stable for home-use type of battery.

Yeah they are.

"*" wrote in message
...
|
| So you disagree with the scientists at the Perdue study.

Of course not. Do you *understand* the scientists at the Purdue study? Do
you know how to spell Purdue?

| Big whoop, you don't know anything except pinning a yarn.

....says the anonymous poster. Come down to my work and I'll let my
engineering staff give you the standard interview. Bring lots of paper, and
something to cry on. Some of us actually do physics for a living.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

"The_Sage" wrote in message
...
Reply to article by: "Mike Dworetsky"
Date written: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 06:53:50 +0000 (UTC)


Editorial comment: If you will notice the applications of this
technology
are for rockets, space travel and military. NO WHERE does it mention
that
this technology is applicable to home use and would give everyone a free
source of energy.

It wasn't mentioned because Hydrogen Peroxide is not a "free source of
energy".
H202 is not found naturally in large quantities so it has to be
*manufactured*
and it takes expensive energy to manufacture it.

The Sage


Hydrogen Production
http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogena...roduction.html

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 14:10:38 -0700, The_Sage wrote:

Reply to article by: "Postpartisan-Libertarian"
Date written: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 07:14:33 GMT


Editorial comment: If you will notice the applications of this technology
are for rockets, space travel and military. NO WHERE does it mention that
this technology is applicable to home use and would give everyone a free
source of energy.

It wasn't mentioned because Hydrogen Peroxide is not a "free source of energy".
H202 is not found naturally in large quantities so it has to be *manufactured*
and it takes expensive energy to manufacture it.

Hydrogen Production
http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogena...roduction.html

That isn't hydrogen peroxide production and of the six methods mentioned in that
article for producing hydrogen alone, only the photobiological one is "free" in
the sense that it doesn't need an external artificial power source to work
(sunlight is considered free). The production of hydrogen peroxide would only
add to that because it is a multi-step process that consumes alot of external
artificial power to work.

But is one hell of a lot more efficient than burning petroleum products and
fossil fuels! And it's NON POLLUTING.

The only problem with hydrogen peroxide fuel cells for home use or burning
hydrogen to create electricity is that it puts the oil companies out of
business and would wreak havoc in a capitalistic economy....

......burning hydrogen or h2o2 fuel cells would redistribute the world's
wealth in a very short time.

"*" wrote in message
...
|
| But is one hell of a lot more efficient than burning petroleum
| products and fossil fuels!

Not when the cost of production is considered. This is the classic "free
energy" hype: ignoring half the problem.

| And it's NON POLLUTING.

Not when the method of mass production is considered. You don't get
hydrogen peroxide simply by shaking up a jar of water.

Hydrogen peroxide is extremely hazardous to have around. It's not "magic
water". That's why they have to dilute it practically to insignificance
before it can be sold to you without a license.

| The only problem with hydrogen peroxide fuel cells for home
| use or burning hydrogen to create electricity is that it puts
| the oil companies out of business and would wreak havoc in a
| capitalistic economy....

No. You just ignore the other problems with using H2O2 as fuel so that your
conspiracy-theory paranoia seems less lunatic. The oil companies don't
control the laws of physics, and those are the laws that say free energy is
impossible.

| .....burning hydrogen or h2o2 fuel cells would redistribute
| the world's wealth in a very short time.

It's already doing that: it's redistributing it from the pockets of the
gullible into the pockets of the unscrupulous.

Give me $10,000 and I'll tell you the secret of free energy.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:00:31 -0600, "Jay Windley"
wrote:

snip baloney response

Give me $10,000 and I'll tell you the secret of free energy.

The secret is free energy isn't profitable for the oil companies.

"*" wrote in message
...
|
| snip baloney response

Sidestep.

| Give me $10,000 and I'll tell you the secret of free energy.
|
| The secret is free energy isn't profitable for the oil companies.

Nope, that's not it. Gee, the "evil oil company" conspiracy theory is so
1964.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org