[One of Many]

ROFL!
This thread is like a bottle of wine- I keeps getting better with age.
I wonder what the carbon footprint of that contraption would be.......

Dho, I didn't keep that in mind Maz. It kinda gives a new meaning to brown coal, don't it?

Although is was a struggle between that and the pure stock of dancing celtics!

DC

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3r4xYqhc3Ns"]YouTube - dancing monkeys[/ame]

[handlewanker]

Nah, Nah, ya' got it wrong man, that's a special medical kit for smoking bees outta ya' rectum if'n ya fell asleep and a swarm of bees got up ya'.

I saw one once on that cable TV antique programme from America where they find treasure in peoples attics.

Apparently, in the very early frontier days of medicine it was thought that bee infestation was present when a loud buzzing sound could be heard when a medico placed his/her ear near your rectum.

The problem is exacerbated when you dine out and eat lots of baked bees....LOL.

It probably gave rise to the song "Smoke gets in my eyes", which is a bit more polite.

However, One Of Many, ya'all probably right on the money about when the water rises, 'cos then ya' just close the case up and use it like a boat with the bellows used to suck up water and jet it out the rear end for propulsion.

There's no end to the wierd contraptions the Yanks dream up, like that gas saving device that uses two stainless steel plates in a jar of ordinary tap water, and connected to your car battery, to give hydrogen and oxygen which is fed to the carburettor by a pipe valve arrangement, which is said to increase the miles per gallon of your petrol, yeah, pull the other one.

The guy, (a Southerner, ex pat Confederate, ya' can tell by his accent, definately not a Yank), gives a cast iron guarantee that the "Myth Busters" don't know sh!t when they dismissed it as rubbish.

P.T. Barnum is alive and kicking.
Ian.

[Rick Tiglon Eng]

Hello all,
Many moons ago (Early 90's) I used to do a bit of freelance prototyping in my home town, in the day it was common for some unfortunate souls to drop in with the "mail order" plans to save the world, invariably the plans were sketchy often supplied in the VHS video format as opposed to, well, plans! My favorite explained the "Bill Phenominon" (spelling intentional) The inventor was named only as Bill as he was on the run from the CIA apparently an oil company conspiracy to finish him off before he brought down the establishment. If built properly it was quoted that the generator could power any aluminium cylinder block engine, but only engines made of aluminium, apparently the engine wasn't running on the Hydrogen that was being produced but rather "zero point energy" in the form of the free ions produced by the effect of magnetically charged conical plates made from fully hard, Austenitic Stainless steel, which had to be manufactured by hand beating and mounted inside a tub of similar material, No welding was allowed in manufacture. I did my best to convince the customer that it was nonsense but he was hooked, He did build it and swore that it worked, it was mysteriously stolen before i saw it function though.

My point is while this sort of thing goes on, and I still see it from time to time. Genuine work in the field of alternate energy supplies are often assumed to be in the same category by the more sceptical and really you cant blame the sceptics. I saw a copy of the Bill Phenominon in a second hand bookshop just a few years ago, between rather more realistic videos on swamp coolers and wind generators.

Best Regards
Rick

[fizzissist]

... effect of magnetically charged conical plates made from fully hard, Austenitic Stainless steel, which had to be manufactured by hand beating...

HEY! That's MY idea!! Magnetically charged austenitic S.S. is what I use in my anti-gravity pogo stick.

One of the guys I work with studies, as an occassional hobby, anti-gravity schemes. It's amazing what some people come up with....often coupling anti-gravity with perpetual motion. Btw, perpetual motion does exist...

....This thread

[handlewanker]

I always thought perpetual motion was a polite way of saying you have a bada case ofa da Gippo Rot Gut, or diarrhoea.

With that in mind I reckon the horizontal position is preferable when you have perpetual motion so's gravity don't agravate the problem.

I reckon the best example of perpetual motion is the way banks just go on printing money when the cupboard is bare.

BTW Rick, were you involved in that helicopter ejector seat they were trialling in the mid 90's?

Apparently it was based on the interuptor mechanism used in the WW1 fighters so that they coud shoot through the propellers when they were in the horizontal position.

It worked a treat, but they couldn't get the descent timing right after ejection, so a lot of testing produced "mixed" results....LOL.
Ian.

[One of Many]

Nah, Nah, ya' got it wrong man, that's a special medical kit for smoking bees outta ya' rectum if'n ya fell asleep and a swarm of bees got up ya'.

I saw one once on that cable TV antique programme from America where they find treasure in peoples attics.

Apparently, in the very early frontier days of medicine it was thought that bee infestation was present when a loud buzzing sound could be heard when a medico placed his/her ear near your rectum.

The problem is exacerbated when you dine out and eat lots of baked bees....LOL.

It probably gave rise to the song "Smoke gets in my eyes", which is a bit more polite.

However, One Of Many, ya'all probably right on the money about when the water rises, 'cos then ya' just close the case up and use it like a boat with the bellows used to suck up water and jet it out the rear end for propulsion.

There's no end to the wierd contraptions the Yanks dream up, like that gas saving device that uses two stainless steel plates in a jar of ordinary tap water, and connected to your car battery, to give hydrogen and oxygen which is fed to the carburettor by a pipe valve arrangement, which is said to increase the miles per gallon of your petrol, yeah, pull the other one.

The guy, (a Southerner, ex pat Confederate, ya' can tell by his accent, definately not a Yank), gives a cast iron guarantee that the "Myth Busters" don't know sh!t when they dismissed it as rubbish.

P.T. Barnum is alive and kicking.
Ian.

One thing I am certain of and that is, the only reason for you to be here is blowing smoke up everyone's arse with what you think you know. It don't take a myth buster to realize the rubbish you post is akin to admitting you don't know sh!t....but you sure spew up a ton of it!

Your constant categorization and labeling says loads about your ability to cast prejudicial aspersions on which you deem to be lesser humanoids than yourself. Oblivious to realize every time you do that you end up looking like the lowest of the lower life forms.

That weird bottle contraption does exactly as claimed......for 30 feet or 5 seconds the hydrogen that is created lasts. Just like most of the alternate energy schemes do in not disclosing the whole reality. Focusing on the minor benefit and ignore the major negative flaws is part of the big boy games you support elsewhere.

Who's blowing more smoke, eh? The guy and his mason jar or, you as a supporter of the subsidized Oz corporation bilking the tax payers for a "free energy" contraption?

DC

[handlewanker]

One Of Them (Many), I wasn't refering to the mythbusters making Hydrogen to fill a garbage bag and so reinvent the Graf Zeppelin in a slightly minute form.

The guy in question, the Confederate fella, was SELLING these items, (US$45), as a kit to increase the mileage got by using only petrol.

The problem is, if you read the post properly, it takes far more energy, (obtained from the car battery), to produce the Hydrogen and Oxygen, which was stated in his blurb "to INCREASE the mileage" in petrol engine cars, and this topic which has gone the rounds, was discounted as a MYTH by the very talented and totally unbiased MYTHBUSTERS.

There was another like system in the 1940's that fed plain old tap water to the carburettor of a cars engine through a small jet, and it was stated, in many books, even the magazine The Motor Car, that "it increased the mileage" you would get from a gallon of petrol etc etc, didn't work, couldn't work, any system that decreases the heat of combustion decreases the expansion ratio of the petrol/air mixture.

It is impossible to break the molecular bond of H2O by heating it to steam, (expecting to mysteriously get freely disassociated Hydrogen and Oxygen) and applying it to a flame, if'n yo' think otherwise, yo' sure is a misguided idiot, and should stand shoulder to shoulder with Al Gore when the next round of the Nobel Peace whatever comes up.

Even a hick on a share holding in deepest Tennesee can explain in two words that if you put water on fire it.......GOES OUT.

Perhaps you or other more scientifically inclined people can refute that observation and in doing so open up another can of worms that would have NASA beating a path to your hovel, to grab you so's they can bury you somewhere and stop you letting the cat outta the bag.

I don't think so, Physics is a very tight science, not for daydreamers or wishfull thinkers, otherwise if wishes were horses then beggers would ride.
Ian.

[Rick Tiglon Eng]

Hello All,
Just a second, on the adding water to "internal combustion engines" thing, I have personally done quite a lot of engine test cell work and can categorically say that; designed well and calibrated properly, addition of a very small amount of water can be advantageous in terms of power and economy, however the cost of such a system is prohibitive and would be very unlikely to pay back any time soon. You will not buy such a system on the internet for $45 and the manufacturers don't fit them because they are "not worth the effort" rather than the chance that they might "bring down the man"

The advantage comes from changes to the expansion rate of the air fuel mix and when the expansion can be slowed sufficiently to ensure that increased pressure is available when the crank pin reaches 90degrees past top dead centre there can be a benefit to torque output, without an increase in combustion temperature, the fact is that water injection is often used to make up for shortfalls in fuel quality, poor combustion chamber design or too high a compression ratio, that would require retarded timing to otherwise function without detonation on lower octane rated fuels. These are usually performance systems rather than economy based systems and so all that matters is that the valves and pistons don't fail. Economy calculations are usually limited to finding out how big the water tank needs to be, so that the system does not run dry mid race/run as this is often catastrophic. Water injection systems were marketed heavily in the "old days" well before EFI made engines reliably efficient, those old enough will remember their mechanic talking about fitting hotter and colder spark plugs at different times of the year and the that sort of thing, it was possible in those times to fit a simple water injection system, advance the timing, pump up your tyres and see better MPG's, but not in modern cars, not practically at any rate. Even when it was possible the concept was not without risk, the intake system was often left damp and damp = rust, rust = sticky rings and marked bores and it was never really worth the effort or risk.

As for hydrogen creation by electrolysis on board vehicles, i have seen one system that made about 2% saving as it was powered purely by regenerative braking, but anything that uses battery, or more correctly alternator power, has always been proven to increase running cost, due mainly to the very poor efficiencies acheived by electrolysis, So if it seems "too good to be true" it probably is.
Best Regards
Rick

[fizzissist]

... Physics is a very tight science, not for daydreamers or wishfull thinkers, otherwise if wishes were horses then beggers would ride.
Ian.

Which goes to prove once again that a) Ian knows little about physics and b)even less about the people who study it.

Ever worked with a theoretical physicist, Ian? I didn't think so. Ever KNOWN a theoretical physicist, Ian? I didn't think so.

[One of Many]

Ian,

Your trend is to make a case for and against any one of these things you display to know little about. You take a stand, then shift whims to reshape the anti-scenario no matter what the issue at the forefront. The life of an arrogant antagonist can't be helped? Whatever…...

The $45 mason jar gadgets mileage INCREASE is no different than the $15,000-$20,000 INCREASE in free energy contraption you brought up earlier that you "PLAN" to invest in. In all honestly, that would take 20 years to recoup if it needed no upkeep and replacement parts. If you would read my post in concurrence, it eludes that both have their inherent myths. Yet you'll bash one and support the other. Since you brought it up, I'd wonder if you've been breathing some of that Graf Zeppelin gas. Although the thought of your head in a garbage bag is beginning to have its appeal! LOL!

Water injection does have some benefits, to wit; economy is but a smaller portion used in the proper proportions and application short of flame degradation. The principle of the water injection contraption was never to break any molecular bonds. The expansion of steam, leaning the mixture and cooling for detonation were intentional. Even a hick like you could do a little research before making senseless blanket statements.

Wiki is only one source at hand

DC

[handlewanker]

One of......., I totally agree with you, some people have made astounding discoveries in the automotive field, and some of the ideas even filter down to the everyday practical levels, but the fruit jar electrolysis gadget I mentioned was a con of the highest magnitude, even at the very modest price of US$45, yet the guy hotly defended himself, despite Myths and co shooting the sh!t outta him.

I remember that water injection gadget too, quite popular reading in all the DIY wreck 'em or fix 'em car mags and going the rounds in the early 60's in UK, but at the end of the day, like all crap ideas, it just died a natural death, otherwise every car known would be fitted with some form or other.

However I don't reacall ever mentioning a $15,000 to $20,000 energy saving gadget on any of the posts going a way back, maybe a A$7,000 Ceramic Fuel cell that not only has been researched and developed to the point of retail sales availability by end of 2009, but is a system that NASA also uses in their space shuttle energy supply.

When it can produce electricity at 40% saving as opposed to buying from the grid, who's arguing?
Oh, and 200 litres of hot water a day too, at that rate I'd chuck my hot water service out and save more gas too, how can I lose?

To answer your question Fizzwizz, NO, I haven't ever worked with, for, or by any Physicist, and I also don't know any Physo's either, I'm was down at the coal face, so to speak, getting my hands dirty occasionally in my previous line of work, as opposed to getting paid for theorising about possibilities that might, in the very fullness of time and given the right environment and enough capitol, enough to correct even the US of A budget deficiency, generate some method that, even be it of a vague nature, might just make it to the inventor's corner on the local cable TV show, but that's mostly wishfull thinking.

In the old days, when science was known as Alchemy, you needed a benevolent sponser to fund you and protect you from the Inquisition with all the experiments that went on, mostly trying to get lead to change into gold, they managed to get the water into wine bit many years before that, but that's another story.

Whenever I hear some science orientated Boffin theorising about a possibility, I'm deeply enthralled by their hypotheses, but would be more impressed by results.

I expect you pick up quite a few tips whilst you're sweeping out the lab after hours, but putting the bits and pieces together to make coherent sense is anothe thing.
Ian.

[One of Many]

One of......., I totally agree with you, some people have made astounding discoveries in the automotive field, and some of the ideas even filter down to the everyday practical levels, but the fruit jar electrolysis gadget I mentioned was a con of the highest magnitude, even at the very modest price of US$45, yet the guy hotly defended himself, despite Myths and co shooting the sh!t outta him.

I remember that water injection gadget too, quite popular reading in all the DIY wreck 'em or fix 'em car mags and going the rounds in the early 60's in UK, but at the end of the day, like all crap ideas, it just died a natural death, otherwise every car known would be fitted with some form or other.

However I don't reacall ever mentioning a $15,000 to $20,000 energy saving gadget on any of the posts going a way back, maybe a A$7,000 Ceramic Fuel cell that not only has been researched and developed to the point of retail sales availability by end of 2009, but is a system that NASA also uses in their space shuttle energy supply.

When it can produce electricity at 40% saving as opposed to buying from the grid, who's arguing?
Oh, and 200 litres of hot water a day too, at that rate I'd chuck my hot water service out and save more gas too, how can I lose?

To answer your question Fizzwizz, NO, I haven't ever worked with, for, or by any Physicist, and I also don't know any Physo's either, I'm was down at the coal face, so to speak, getting my hands dirty occasionally in my previous line of work, as opposed to getting paid for theorising about possibilities that might, in the very fullness of time and given the right environment and enough capitol, enough to correct even the US of A budget deficiency, generate some method that, even be it of a vague nature, might just make it to the inventor's corner on the local cable TV show, but that's mostly wishfull thinking.

In the old days, when science was known as Alchemy, you needed a benevolent sponser to fund you and protect you from the Inquisition with all the experiments that went on, mostly trying to get lead to change into gold, they managed to get the water into wine bit many years before that, but that's another story.

Whenever I hear some science orientated Boffin theorising about a possibility, I'm deeply enthralled by their hypotheses, but would be more impressed by results.

I expect you pick up quite a few tips whilst you're sweeping out the lab after hours, but putting the bits and pieces together to make coherent sense is anothe thing.
Ian.

With appologies for mis-quoting the price, but I think the cost of the machine, installation and cost of ownership was nearing 15-20K. As I said back then, it may be viable for remote locations where there is few options. The burner is known not to last as long as required for payback at the current Kwh for city dwellers. It too may end up dying a natural death....with the exception of NASA and military applications where cost is relative to need. We'll see if your theory of saving power or money turns into another trial as alchemy. If that works for your local as well as swamp coolers, go for it. I hope you live long enough to realize some return, but I have my doubts. Not on your longevity, but the returns. Your too ornery to kick off any time soon! As they say, only the good die young.

There was a gas additive product called Mix-e-go or some such label that put lead and other lubricants back in the fuel stream to improve wear and fuel efficiency. Total disregard for the unleaded fuel catalytic converter clogging byproduct, but sold a bazillion dollars for a couple years. Just like the stories of the 100mph carb and Brown's gas and velocity stir ring secret conspiracies where the government and oil companies bought all of it to hide. Much of this green movement is still on the same level. There is another sucker born every minute that must defend their product or purchases. As Rick stated, if it sounds to good to be true, chances are high it will never match the hype as sold.



DC

[handlewanker]

Hmmmmmmm, now I'm worried, at the payback and total packet outlay.......come the end of the year, 2009, the "Thing" is supposed to come on the retail market, so I'll keep a sharp eye on it.

The Blurb didn't actually indicate that it was designed more for outback remote location dwellers, but as a device to replace the grid user reliance on the grid, save on coal fired power station useage and at big saving on electrics etc etc, we'll see.
Ian.

[fizzissist]

To answer your question Fizzwizz, NO, I haven't ever worked with, for, or by any Physicist, and I also don't know any Physo's either, I'm was down at the coal face, so to speak, getting my hands dirty occasionally in my previous line of work, as opposed to getting paid for theorising about possibilities that might, in the very fullness of time and given the right environment and enough capitol, enough to correct even the US of A budget deficiency, generate some method that, even be it of a vague nature, might just make it to the inventor's corner on the local cable TV show, but that's mostly wishfull thinking.


Whenever I hear some science orientated Boffin theorising about a possibility, I'm deeply enthralled by their hypotheses, but would be more impressed by results.

I expect you pick up quite a few tips whilst you're sweeping out the lab after hours, but putting the bits and pieces together to make coherent sense is anothe thing.
Ian.

Sorry, bub. I do a bit more than sweep up the lab after hours. In any case, you just dug yourself a deeper hole. You know NOTHING about how research travels from lab to your dinner table. Things I have worked on affect your life now. Some took longer than others to 'hit the market', so to speak, but stuff that's come out of where I work and what I do is now, and will, make a difference.

Anything you do depend on GPS? Extremely accurate time? Potable water? High energy density power? Oh. Not surprised.

Was hoping that your life was more than just bubbles in beer. Keep forgetting, you're the paradigm for Yahoo Serious.

...One more thing....The guilt trip that you were digging coal and walking 25mi to school through the snow and fighting indians growing up while I've been suckin' on a silver spoon was weak. Pathetically weak. Grasping at straws weak.

[One of Many]

Hmmmmmmm, now I'm worried, at the payback and total packet outlay.......come the end of the year, 2009, the "Thing" is supposed to come on the retail market, so I'll keep a sharp eye on it.

The Blurb didn't actually indicate that it was designed more for outback remote location dwellers, but as a device to replace the grid user reliance on the grid, save on coal fired power station useage and at big saving on electrics etc etc, we'll see.
Ian.

One blurb does not say much. You have to look at their site and then look elsewhere to gather the bigger picture, which is probably where I seen the projected cost of ownership. Plainly stated, all maintainance and replacement cost is bore by the home owner.

CFLCL.com
Markets
Launch info




To date they can claim they have a target price of $8000 not including the water tank and a 5year life of the burner. I don't see how they can make such reliable promising claims on only 3 prototypes. They also do not intend to produce them, but are contracting that out. Production is projected mid 2010 for Europe, Japan and Germany where power is high value. The other hurdle is getting safety approval. They mention somewhere in a PDF that these home units are not intended to replace the grid nor hot water, but supplement it. Therefore I question the claim that it will generate 17kw annually with 60% going back to the grid.

There are lots of claims, but no hard facts based on thousdands of units in use. After 10+ years of R&D seems they would have better stats.

Yes, we'll see! To me it looks like 8 grand in mason jars.

The dislcaimer is certainly disconcerting!

This Presentation has been prepared by, and is proprietary to, Ceramic Fuel Cells Limited (‘CFCL’).
This Presentation does not constitute or form part of an offer for sale or subscription or an invitation or solicitation of an offer to subscribe for or purchase any securities and neither this document nor anything contained herein shall form the basis of any contract or commitment whatsoever.
No representation or warranty, express or implied, is given by CFCL, its Directors, employees or professional advisors as to the accuracy, fairness, sufficiency or completeness of the information, opinions or beliefs contained in this document. Except in the case of fraud, no liability is accepted for any loss, cost or damage suffered or incurred as a result of the reliance on such information, opinions or beliefs.
The information in this Presentation reflects prevailing conditions and the views of CFCL as of this date, which are subject to change.

DC

[handlewanker]

I guess this was something like the advert for the Titanic, "pay now live later, maybe".

Oh well the fuel cell wotsit was something exciting in our local, very local that is, community news paper when the Premier John Brumby and co launched the new product.

If'n it reduces the carbon footprint a bit, then what more can you expect, besides the greens will be appeased, so that's something.

I have a very nasty habit of reading the extremely fine print when tying into some form of technology or other, and if so much as a mention is made of any vague promises, I walk away.

BTW Fizzwizz, glad to see yo'all are doing your bit to make the country prosperous.

Incidently, I don't have a GPS thingy, only a road map book, (does Google Earth count?), and the time just takes second place to my lifestyle nowadays, but as for the "high energy density power" ?? nope, only got gas and electric sort, but my Ipod MP3 look alike runs on Lithium batteries, so if'n ya' had a hand in that gizmo, have a beer on me.

BTW, I don't drink beer much, never have and never likely to take up the habit much, but be my guest, ya'all can swill ya' self silly if'n it takes yo' fancy.

Pardon the pun about "sweeping out the lab after hours", I was going to say "cleaning the toilets", but that would have been too personal, so what exactly do you do in that Alchemist plaground in the deepest depths of Physicalia?
Ian.

[fizzissist]

Pardon the pun about "sweeping out the lab after hours", I was going to say "cleaning the toilets", but that would have been too personal, so what exactly do you do in that Alchemist plaground in the deepest depths of Physicalia?
Ian.

You know all you need to know about what I do. For the record, I do sweep the floors when I'm done. I've even had the privilege to sweep up when I was done in Iwama, Japan.

[Rick Tiglon Eng]

Hello All,
I do like the name that fuel cell device (if that is what it is) has picked up here, "The Thing" i always thought they needed to make fuel cells or any cutting edge tech, making it to market for that matter, a bit more exicting. Acronyms are fine for the techno generation, but i like the idea of naming such gear after 50's Sci fi movies, just makes it a bit more exciting and might finally see some of that 50's future come true.
By the way when you all get nasty, would you mind leaving Yahoo serious out of it, as despite his appearance, he is quite a smart bloke, he one of my home town Heros, and I have met him, before the release of Young Einstein. He was a bit of a smooth talker at the time, but any one that can even partially, write, direct and produce a movie on his budget then make a fortune out of the resulting show, starting out as a Tyre fitter. well he does actually deserve some respect.
As for Physics not being for day dreamers, Isaac Newton was described by his own mother, as not being very good as a farmer, because he was a bit too much of a daydreamer. Apparently he was of the opinion that what separated him from others was his ability to continue thinking through a problem until all of the thinking had been finished, to my mind that would look like daydreaming to most mums, certainly would to mine.

Best Regards
Rick

[handlewanker]

Touche Fizzwizz, now we know ALL that you do, you sweep out labs in your country of choice and sometimes abroad, picking up snipperts of information along the way.
Oh well, as long as the funding is maintained, who am I to blow against the wind.

About that fuel cell "Thing", (I hope it's going to be more than a "Thing"), it's designed to go in or outside of the domicile, so with the litigation forum standing by to "pick up the pieces" in the event of an occurence, It's no wonder some disclaimer is in force.

This is a bit like the constant average Americanism "don't try this at home", which accompanies the most simplistic DIY demo on just about all the Yank TV programs beamed to the outside world, a phraseology that is so steeped in assuming the general public has been so dummed down during their school lives, that they are now incapable of differentiating between what will entertain you and what will bite you big time.

You get it on all the Chinese imports too, vast instruction sheets warning you of the consequences of opening the package, that's before you even get to the product, stuff like "don't eat this product", it's a bloody condom for c**ssake, but on the other hand I suppose it could be "eaten"....LOL, anyway, disclaimers are arse coverers, just in case someone were to use it in an inappropriate manner.

The fuel cell in question has been undergoing development by the CSIRO, and is in production by Ceramic Fuel Cells, the company, and they are also in cahoots with local companies probably to produce the peripherals that make the "thing" tick, much like the car trade, whereby you buy a home produced car and get all the other manufacturers of the "bits and pieces" with their badges on them, on board too.

When it eventually hits the showroom floor, the price and "upgraded/downplayed" specs will determine the viability, but as the man said, "it will replace some of the brown coal burning capacity, and reduce the carbon footprint by X %, to get the emission output down by 5% before 2020", which aint a bad thing, as this means we'all can export more of the brown stuff to the Chinese, and make lots of money, so subsidizing the fuel cell product, while giving them the headache of solving the emissions problem, how cool can you get, killing two birds with one stone, they don't call OZ the lucky country for nix.

Aside from saving on electric producton, we'all have a water shortage problem, so if'n someone comes up with a simple solution to get unlimited fresh water from the unlimited sea water resource without losing an arm and a leg in the process, he/she will guarantee a Nobel Prize thingy, you have my word on it.

Here's a question for the most learnerd, if you have a container of salt water, (seawater), and you pull a vacuum in the container to about 28 inches of mercury, will the water "boil" and come off as clean water vapour, leaving the salt behind or will the water, giving up it's latent heat freeze to ice?

How will the water vapour coming off be converted back to water if it is already cold and therefore cannot be condensed as steam would? Would this method work better if the water was at a temperature of 30 degrees C?

Would it work at all?
Ian.

[fizzissist]

The vacuum approach to distilling water just isn't practical. Too many obstacles, too much hardware, and too much energy required.

Here's a good link for basic info on vacuum system design...this one intended for building a laser. http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasercva.htm#cvacvs4

As you can see, there's different types of pumps for different levels of vacuum, and each have their advantages and ... costs. None of them, however, are designed to handle a large water load, and with roughing pumps, you get the blessing of vacuum oil coming along with the output. Kinda spoils the "product", so to speak. You also can't just stick 'em all in series, and collecting the water ... well, they just aren't designed for that.

What you're essentially talking about is freeze drying, but it's expensive, and takes a fair amount of time.... Boiling is faster and more efficient. A combination of heating the water to around 100degF and pulling a vacuum is used in commercial units.

http://www.wastechengineering.com/pr...n-systems.html

In answer to the purity question, when you sublimate, you'll get pretty pure water.