Joined: 16 Jun 2008 Posts: 37 Location: El Medano, Tenerife, Spain
madthumbs wrote:
Quite a slick video, kinda like Loose Change. I'd give up on this idea of running cars on water if there weren't all the stories of mysterious deaths surrounding them. At the very least, HHO could be made using nano solar panels on cars.
A bit hard. Brilliant sunshine full on at US latitude gives 2Kw/M2. Panel efficiency 10% takes that down to 0.2Kw/M2. The best you could do (with the whole top of a camper van aligned E-W and tilted 30 degrees) would be to collect perhaps 15Kw-hours per day on what sunlight energy this large-topped vehicle could collect. If your cruise demand were 30Kw at 55 mph then you would travel for half an hour and go 27.5 miles. You would have to carry 25 car batteries as well - but you could throw away the internal combustion motor...
If I had a camper I think I would go for a quasi-turbine steam engine and wood-burning boiler. That way I could use deadwood and/or driftwood whenever I found it. Also the camper would ALWAYS be warm. The trouble with pure electric drives is their high efficiency doesn't allow for much air heating...
edisme wrote:
I'm hardly the person qualified to make a case for either side. I posted because it is important to see both sides of the argument in regards to this. I was hoping Tripled would take the bait but he hasn't been around in a while.
The geezer in the above video is a good scientist, honest, and doesn't mince his words. Normally he argues with creationists. What he says is true. You can't buck "the system", namely the second law of thermodynamics. NOTHING is for free!
Most production tools in the solar industry tend to have a 10-30 megawatt (MW) annual production capacity. How is it possible to have a single tool with gigawatt throughput?
This feat is fundamentally enabled through the proprietary nanoparticle ink we have spent so many years developing. It allows us to deliver efficient solar cells (presently up to more than 14%) that are simply printed.
We're not talking a single panel here anymore. The dash, windows and shell of the car can be coated with solar particle plastic or ink.
Quote:
If your cruise demand were 30Kw at 55 mph then you would travel for half an hour and go 27.5 miles.
- Way more than I need to get to work and back as well as anywhere else I'd need to go.
Quote:
You would have to carry 25 car batteries as well - but you could throw away the internal combustion motor...
Good trade off.
Quote:
You can't buck "the system", namely the second law of thermodynamics. NOTHING is for free!
But, seeing as http://www.xogentechnologies.ca/ (directly related to Stanley Meyers) is finally! taking off, i fully stand by my previous statements regarding his "technologies"
<--not directed at anyone in particular-->
Just because everyone else is jumping off the cliff (ie: electrolysis, cant get Meyers stuff to work etc etc) does not mean you have to follow them.
You always have a choice, you can either get down and dirty and learn some electrical principals to get his circuits to work for you (or his injectors) or you can continue making excuses for following everyone else off the cliff.
Cheers!
Tripled
edisme wrote:
madthumbs wrote:
Quite a slick video, kinda like Loose Change.
I'd give up on this idea of running cars on water if there weren't all the stories of mysterious deaths surrounding them. At the very least, HHO could be made using nano solar panels on cars.
I'm hardly the person qualified to make a case for either side. I posted because it is important to see both sides of the argument in regards to this. I was hoping Tripled would take the bait but he hasn't been around in a while.
