Military Review

US Navy sees seawater as fuel

55
Probably, many owners of a personal car would dream of refueling it not with gasoline, but with ordinary water. This way of refueling would greatly simplify everyone’s life and save extra rubles. But such thoughts in most of us will only cause a smile. However, we live in a world in which the most impossible, at first glance, things can be implemented in practice. Currently, the US Navy is seriously involved in sponsoring the creation of fuel based on ordinary sea water. The goal of the U.S. military is to ensure its naval fleet fuel obtained from sea water. A facility that is capable of generating fuel from water was introduced by the U.S. Navy Research Laboratory (NRL) on April 7, 2014.


Currently, most American warships are powered by hydrocarbon fuels. For this reason, the cruising range of combat ships is limited by the capacity of their tanks. Partly, this problem can be solved by special ships - tankers, refueling, which accompany the American carrier-based groups. Today, nuclear reactors as the main power plants are installed only on American submarines (nuclear) and aircraft carriers, while all other escort ships operate on a more conventional type of fuel. In the Russian Navy, nuclear reactors are installed on the 1144 Orlan heavy missile cruisers, these include the Peter the Great heavy nuclear missile cruiser, as well as submarines (nuclear). At the same time, refueling ships at sea is not the easiest task, especially in bad weather, the refueling process can take several hours and requires complicated maneuvers.

The US Navy believes that they managed to find a solution to this problem - in carbon dioxide (carbon dioxide CO2). The idea is to extract it and hydrogen (H2) directly from seawater. In the future, CO2 and H2 can be quite easily converted into fuel, refueling ships right during the hikes. This perspective is very much like the military. In fact, at present, the US Navy needs to contain 15 tanker ships, which are able to transport up to 2,27 billion liters of fuel to refuel warships at sea. All this requires the competent solution of quite complex logistical tasks to support fleets at sea and requires constant monitoring of all maritime communications that may be needed to ensure supplies.

US Navy sees seawater as fuel
Ship refueling at sea

The concentration of carbon dioxide in sea water is approximately 140 times higher than in the atmosphere and only 3 times less than, for example, in the smoke of the pipes of a combined heat and power plant. In this case, 2-3% of carbon dioxide is presented in the form of carbonic acid (H2CO3), and the rest - its esters and salts: hydrocarbonates (96-97%) and carbonates (1%). It is worth noting that in combination with H2 carbon dioxide is a ready-made raw material that can be used to synthesize hydrocarbon fuels.

However, the two most important problems remain: how to simultaneously extract the necessary CO2 and H2 from sea water, and how to efficiently synthesize them into a hydrocarbon fuel that would be suitable for use. NRL specialists say that they managed to resolve both issues, but for the time being they have not disclosed specific details. It is reported that the new technology received the designation GTL.

The “heart” of the installation, which was demonstrated by 7 in April, is a special E-CEM module - a module of electrolytic cation exchange, which, according to the developers, is able to separate CO2 and H2 from sea water with very high efficiency 92%. The gases thus obtained are subsequently converted into liquid hydrocarbons. Under normal conditions, this would be methane (CH4), however, due to the use of specially selected catalysts (the authors keep the chemical formula in secret), the output succeeds in obtaining comparative long alkenes (ethylene hydrocarbons) in 60% of cases.


Electrolytic cation exchange module

Such hydrocarbons can already be used in modern chemical industry, as well as in some types of fuel. Subsequently, using controlled polymerization, they are converted into long chains, which already contain from 9 to 16 carbon atoms. Such indicators are close to the fuel that is used today in internal combustion engines - internal combustion engines. For example, gasoline contains fractions of carbohydrates in the C5-C12 range, kerosene - C9-C17, diesel fuel - C8-C24.

Until recently, such technologies could be observed only in laboratories that were engaged in the release of a few milliliters of fuel. However, the American scientists from NRL managed to scale this technology for the first time; moreover, they say that it can be used in the navy practically on an industrial scale.

The fact that the fuel obtained in this way can really make the engines work was demonstrated on a small radio-controlled demonstration aircraft. The radio-controlled model of the American fighter of the Second World War P-51 Mustang was fueled with fuel derived from sea water. The radio-controlled model, equipped with a small internal combustion engine, clearly demonstrated the potential of technology for producing carbon dioxide and hydrogen from seawater with their subsequent transformation into fuel. It is especially emphasized that the developers did not make any changes to the small two-stroke motor of a radio-controlled aircraft. With experimental fuel, a toy plane flew no worse than normal. According to the authors of the project, on real ships and airplanes, no alterations of internal combustion engines will be required either.


Scientists estimate that the cost of fuel derived from sea water will be only from 8 to 16 cents per liter. However, at the moment, the main problem of the whole project is scaling: the experimental setup available to the NRL is still not powerful enough to provide the entire ship with fuel. The creation of a full-fledged industrial installation can take at least 7 years, provided that the project will be funded in sufficient amount. By this date, the developers promise to build a full-scale ground processing plant, a floating installation option can be born much later.

According to the scientists working on this project, GTL technology can become commercially viable after about 7-10 years. The main work is now underway to create a more powerful installation. If these works end successfully, the fleet will have a real opportunity to provide fuel to remote ships, in particular, aircraft carriers and naval bases. Carriers that will be able to independently provide their escort ships with fuel will be able to significantly increase the combat stability and autonomy of the AUG - carrier strike groups. Currently, the United States Navy has 11 AUG on alert. 10 have the home ports of the naval base in the United States, one - the base in Japan (Yokosuka).

It is worth noting that not everything is so rosy on this issue, although progress has been made. The process of producing fuel from carbon dioxide and hydrogen, derived from seawater, is itself quite energy intensive. In order to produce fuel on board a warship, free energy is needed. Even when the ship does not need its own hydrocarbon fuel resource (as with nuclear aircraft carriers), it will need an increased amount of energy from other sources, which will be spent on the production of fuel from seawater. And this again brings us back to where we started - to the problem of refueling, although in a somewhat different aspect.

Information sources:
http://rnd.cnews.ru/army/news/top/index_science.shtml?2014/04/08/567300
http://rusplt.ru/world/dvigatel-na-morskoy-vode-9193.html
http://www.popmech.ru/article/11803-korabl-na-vode
Author:
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Metal
    Metal April 15 2014 09: 06
    +3
    The whole world is in search of alternative energy sources. And we should not fall behind in this area!
    1. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim April 15 2014 09: 44
      +10
      And we, too, are not born!
      1. Kadavercianin
        Kadavercianin April 15 2014 14: 15
        0
        I read a little, once about this. In this scenario, the waste will generally be show off.
        By the way, at the expense of the conversion of carbon dioxide from ocean water, as if it would not cause serious harm to the ecology of those regions where it will be extracted. Of course, I know that in general in the ocean its gigatons, but still, with a regional fence, this may be another option. I’m for the fact that they will later want to use this technology on an industrial scale, for example, in order to convert the sun and wind into useful hydrocarbons.
        1. Canep
          Canep April 15 2014 15: 15
          +3
          This will require huge amounts of energy, which will not be replenished when burning this fuel, all this makes sense when not a single gram of fossil fuel is left on the ground.
          1. bvi1965
            bvi1965 April 15 2014 15: 55
            +2
            And what sizes will be the installation for synthesis is not yet known ...
      2. biznaw
        biznaw April 15 2014 16: 06
        +2
        Yes, it's almost an eternal engine! When three logs of wood are burned, the fourth is obtained!
      3. zarya
        zarya April 16 2014 10: 52
        0
        Great! Then, those 500 tons of weapons-grade plutonium (?) That were sold under Yeltsin for this way in the USA can be worked out.

        In general, you give atomic energy!
    2. atarix
      atarix April 15 2014 10: 00
      +16
      remake all the water in Lutz ...
      Kyu!
      1. Canep
        Canep April 15 2014 15: 12
        +4
        And then they will make and sell water from Luts. laughing
    3. atarix
      atarix April 15 2014 10: 00
      +1
      remake all the water in Lutz ...
      Kyu!
    4. biznaw
      biznaw April 15 2014 15: 34
      +2
      In secret ... I have an uncle in Leningrad in a "box" on this topic in the 80s worked, so it is possible that under Bes, someone sold their homeland to the SSPs. The catalysts were selected, the problem was the costs of implementation in industry and energy. Postponed until better technological times. Well, let's see how they can handle it ... the laboratory prototype is one thing, but the existing installation is another. the tokomak has not yet been made.
  2. Sypress
    Sypress April 15 2014 09: 26
    +4
    The idea is interesting, although it resembles an attempt to invent a perpetual motion machine.
    1. from punk
      from punk April 15 2014 10: 49
      +2
      Quote: Sypress
      The idea is interesting, although it resembles an attempt to invent a perpetual motion machine.

      I’m more interested in what to do with such a thing — as a very high corrosion resistance of sea water, it seems to me that the price of 16 cents is not for industrial volumes. Yes, and in general, what kind of energy should be used to transform chains. Gold can also be made from lead, but Akhov’s costs
      1. postman
        postman April 15 2014 12: 30
        0
        Quote: punk
        I'm more interested in what to do with such a thing, like a very high corrosion of sea water

        How can marine corrosion (one of the types of electrochemical corrosion) "hinder" this process, if this process is based precisely on electrolytic cation exchange?

        / Fresh water, this will not work /
        ?
    2. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre April 15 2014 11: 42
      +5
      It is she who is.
      The purpose of the US military is to provide its navy with fuel derived from sea water. A working installation that is able to produce fuel from water, was introduced by the U.S. Navy Research Laboratory (NRL) on April 7, 2014.
      This installation should also work on something. It does not function by the holy spirit. When burning hydrocarbon fuels, the energy of the chemical bond is released during the rearrangement of atoms into new molecules -> carbon dioxide and water. For the reverse transformation, this energy must be transferred from outside (from the installation) to the same atoms. With or without catalysts, but it needs to be SPENT. Plus losses, since the efficiency of the device cannot be 100%. And to spend this energy. it must be taken from somewhere.
      Where from ?! From a nuclear reactor? But then it’s easier to directly use it to rotate the turbines. From the wind? Yes, a freebie, but the fuel reproduction capacity is obviously lower than that required for a warship.

      What can you tell the developers? - "Saw, Shura, saw. They are golden."
      The situation is like in that joke: We’ll sell a carriage of vodka and drink the money (instead of drinking this vodka directly).
      1. postman
        postman April 15 2014 12: 33
        +1
        Quote: abrakadabre
        What can developers say?

        advise to mine gold and transurans from sea water.
        That still "idea":
        After the First World War, when Germany had to pay military indemnity (132 billion gold marks = 50 tons of gold), she seriously took up the problem of mining gold from the ocean.
      2. biznaw
        biznaw April 15 2014 15: 45
        -2
        Another task is to provide warships with the usual fuel, which are mostly gas turbine or diesel. In war, value does not matter. It matters whether there is fuel or not. The energy is of course from a nuclear reactor.
        1. Alex
          Alex 8 July 2014 19: 13
          +3
          Quote: biznaw
          Another task is to provide warships with the usual fuel, which are mostly gas turbine or diesel. In war, value does not matter.
          And where to get this fuel? On the ship itself? What size ship should it be in order to carry a chemical plant besides weapons and its systems? Yes with the staff. To put platforms in the sea? And how long will they live in a war?
  3. FunkschNNX
    FunkschNNX April 15 2014 09: 29
    +5
    As far as I remember school chemistry, the energy required to break bonds in a water molecule is at best equal to the energy from burning the resulting volume of detonating gas. Even if they managed to "screw" carbon there, I think the efficiency of the installation (taking into account the entire chain of transformations) will be ridiculous. This time.
    Secondly. We have already fallen asleep ... if everything we could reach, let us now drain the ocean. If you burn the gases obtained during the decomposition of water, then water will be produced again, but in this case, as I understand it, the same CO and CO2 will be obtained
    They need to show the famous film Danelia.
    1. NOMADE
      NOMADE April 15 2014 09: 38
      +3
      You're right. But in fact, they will use atomic energy for this process. The idea is very interesting. True, such a low cost of fuel is embarrassing ... maybe it will come out the same way as with the F-22 programs - 35, and eventually grow many times over.
      1. abrakadabre
        abrakadabre April 15 2014 11: 48
        +1
        But in fact, they will use atomic energy for this process.
        Then isn’t it easier to directly use nuclear energy for movement? As already done on submarines and aircraft carriers.
    2. Morgan
      Morgan April 15 2014 12: 21
      0
      Get as usual - water and carbon dioxide. Your guess is wrong.
      1. FunkschNNX
        FunkschNNX April 15 2014 12: 27
        +1
        Quote: Morgan
        Get as usual - water and carbon dioxide.
        The gases thus obtained are subsequently converted into liquid hydrocarbons. Under normal conditions, it would be methane (CH4), however, thanks to the use of specially selected catalysts (the authors keep the chemical formula secret), it is possible to obtain comparatively long alkenes (ethylene hydrocarbons) in 60% of cases.
        I’m certainly not a chemist, but it seems to me that water will not work when burning hydrocarbons, at least petroleum products (they are also hydrocarbons) only emit muck during combustion.
        1. Morgan
          Morgan April 15 2014 13: 24
          +3
          Nifiga. FULL combustion of hydrocarbons produces water and carbon dioxide. Mucks are formed from additives and with incomplete combustion. I taught chemistry well at the university. The tablet does not know how to transfer formulas, but it would be illustrated.
          1. igordok
            igordok April 15 2014 14: 22
            0
            Quote: Morgan
            FULL combustion of hydrocarbons produces water and carbon dioxide.

            Which we use again. And you want to say that there is no perpetual motion machine. laughing
          2. FunkschNNX
            FunkschNNX April 15 2014 14: 25
            0
            Well, I'm not a chemist, the formulas will say little to me, I will take my word for it :-)
          3. Alex
            Alex 8 July 2014 19: 29
            +3
            Quote: Фкенщь13
            It seems to me that water will not work when burning hydrocarbons, at least oil products (they are also hydrocarbons) only emit muck during combustion.


            Quote: Morgan
            FULL combustion of hydrocarbons produces water and carbon dioxide. Mucks are formed from additives and with incomplete combustion.


            Water is ALWAYS formed when burning any hydrogen-containing compounds (this process is most beneficial from both an energy and an entropic point of view). But what other elements form is a matter of specific conditions. At the expense of hydrocarbons - see my post above. Another example: hydrogen sulfide - a fairly simple H2S molecule - when burning, in addition to water, it can produce both sulfur and SO2 sulfur dioxide. And this, rightly said, without considering a bunch of additional connections.
        2. spech
          spech April 15 2014 16: 54
          0
          that when burning hydrocarbons, water will not work

          H2O and CO2
      2. Alex
        Alex 8 July 2014 19: 22
        +3
        Quote: Morgan
        Get as usual - water and carbon dioxide. Your guess is wrong.
        This is ideal, with a large excess of oxygen and a controlled reaction.
        Combustion of hydrocarbons is a reaction belonging to the class of oxidative degradation. In this case, several processes occur: chain breaking (destruction), the formation of hydroperoxides (unstable compounds - adducts of the addition of oxygen to a hydrocarbon), the redistribution of bonds in hydroperoxides with the formation of oxidation products (oxidation itself). This last process determines the qualitative and quantitative composition of combustion products. With small lengths of degradation products, oxides are usually formed (CO2 - with an excess of oxygen, CO - with a deficiency) or C (soot) - with a large deficiency. With a long length, the situation is complicated: products of incomplete oxidation can form, as a rule, lower aldehydes and carboxylic acids, which, of course, can also burn later, but much worse. That is why, even under the most favorable conditions, CO2 at 100% is never formed in combustion products, products of incomplete oxidation are always present.
  4. olegff68
    olegff68 April 15 2014 09: 29
    +3
    Fuel will run up "luts" ...
    What kind of sea, dear, have long been made of them ... (c)
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. inkass_98
    inkass_98 April 15 2014 09: 46
    +3
    I, of course, am not an expert, but is it not easier then to switch to hydrogen engines or to an engine already in fuel cells than to deal first with the decomposition of water, then with the synthesis of hydrocarbon fuel? In the case of decomposition of water into hydrogen and oxygen and the use of engines using this fuel, the environmental component will be much higher, only water and CO at the outlet. In my opinion, this is another cut of the budget dough with a good prospect for 7-10 of the coming years. And then according to Nasruddin, someone will die, and the project will be quietly covered.
    1. Evil Pole
      Evil Pole April 15 2014 10: 12
      0
      IMHO.
      Quote: inkass_98
      In my opinion, this is another cut of the budget dough with a good perspective for the next 7-10 years. And then according to Nasruddin - someone will die, and the project will be quietly covered.

      We will go further, learn how to extract deuterium from sea water and use it in fundamentally new power plants. After all, Russians are not looking for easy ways, are they? good fellow
    2. Morgan
      Morgan April 15 2014 12: 19
      0
      It is difficult to store hydrogen; it is explosive.
  7. upasika1918
    upasika1918 April 15 2014 10: 00
    +9
    Sawing grandmas. Another freon scam. All refrigerators in the world and spray-cans were replaced, trillions were seized, the ozone hole remained as it was. The shale gas scam will collapse as soon as massive workover begins and the export of liquefied gas is disrupted. Many of us should remember the beautiful scheme in the chemistry classrooms called "AIR_ RAW MATERIALS FOR CHEMICAL INDUSTRY". At the entrance there is air, at the exit everything and everyone. 80 years later, chemists can only produce compressed or liquefied oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide. All chemistry is based on oil and gas. We cannot dispose of the associated gas - catalysts are expensive, but the gas from different fields is different, subsidies do not cover the costs. Coal gasification cannot be solved for more than 100 years. And here's a new squeak! Fuel from sea water !!! Can? Yes, you can. You can use gold, uranium, or any element. But the PRICE, Mama don't worry. The second law of thermodynamics cannot be avoided. Can you build a rig for an Aircraft Carrier? Yes, the size of an aircraft carrier. And next to them will be a Nuclear Power Station the size of an aircraft carrier. Everything is allowed. The laser cannon will hit a target a hundred kilometers away in space. Eating in one shot the monthly output of Dneproges, and then if the target is motionless. The Big Star Wars PANAMA ate Tens Trillions and quietly archived. Sea-based missile defense, from the same opera. Is it possible to build a pyramid of Cheops on the Moon? Yes, you can ... The Amerians are driving another blizzard: they say, beware of oil and gas exporters ... Should we pretend that we were scared? Or start building a pyramid on the moon?
    1. Alex
      Alex 8 July 2014 19: 33
      +3
      Quote: upasika1918
      Should we pretend to be scared? Or start building a pyramid on the moon?

      Bravo and bravo again !!! good Better not say!
  8. Rohon
    Rohon April 15 2014 10: 03
    +1
    They tried to evaporate gold from sea water ...
  9. Lazy
    Lazy April 15 2014 10: 14
    +3
    Yes, this is the whole article! Don't get fooled! It's like a technology to get speeds above the speed of light. Processes such as "re-molecularization" of sea water, it will (IF will be), to put it mildly, many times more energy-intensive than conventional internal combustion engines. This prosoto is unscientific. The sources of information, as I understand it, are the same as they wrote about the abductions by aliens? -))) It's just surprising that this "news" here many began to treat as something really promising -)
    1. Morgan
      Morgan April 15 2014 12: 07
      +2
      Right. My chemistry course is not school. The energy consumption for the synthesis of hydrocarbons is rather big even from other hydrocarbons (remember German synthetic gasoline from coal), the water is separated by electrolysis ... There is generally a huge binding energy (oxygen is the second most powerful elementary oxidizer after fluorine). Installation will be VERY energy intensive. Instead of a tanker, there will be a floating fuel plant with nuclear power plants on board. The only thing that can be achieved is an increase in the ESCADRED sailing range of the entire squadron to the level of autonomy for provisions. Definitely saw the loot or they terribly catch us.
  10. Nitarius
    Nitarius April 15 2014 10: 44
    -3

    Mustache has long been!
    ... In "TM" (No. 10, 1962) an article by V. Vasilevsky was published, in which it was reported that back in 1917, an immigrant from Portugal, who arrived in the USA, Andres invented fuel for ICE, adding some simple water to plain water and cheap chemicals (a few drops per bucket of water). This fuel was tested by a special state commission on a car in the run of New York - Washington and back. After that, one of the largest US oil monopolies for two million dollars in cash bought from Andres documentation and the rights to this invention, hiding it in their safes. Andres himself, two days after receiving the money, disappeared without a trace. The authenticity of the invention of this water fuel was confirmed by a number of publications (Esquire newspaper, articles in the journal Proceedings of the United States Marine Institute in 1926 and 1936). The data of the article by V. Vasilevsky can be completely trusted, for this was hidden behind the former head of the department of scientific and technical intelligence of the KGB of the USSR, who had headed it since the 30s.

    In 1974, a six-stroke ICE was developed in the United States, having a KPI twice that of a traditional one. Essence: fifth step - water injection; the sixth step is the work of water vapor. Firstly, this engine had a KPI, obviously exceeding the KPI of the Carnot cycle. Secondly, assuming the KPI of a good ICE of that time to be 55% (our "loose" ones had 42-50%), then the KPI of a six-stroke ICE is more than one.

    In the 30s, Shell announced a tender to create a car with minimal fuel consumption. “Forget it,” even before the war, “Studebakers” were created with a fuel consumption of 5,5 liters per 100 km. The record belongs to the Japanese - in 1986, a specially created car they consumed per 100 km in total ... 0,055 liters of gasoline (about 44 grams). I hope it is clear that there are no factories producing such engines today.
    It is clear that all these internal combustion engines have an efficiency greater than the “unattainable” efficiency of the Carnot cycle. This also follows from the principle of operation of refrigerators. V. Zysina, working on the invented "triangular cycles". These refrigerators were produced in small batches since 1962 and during their work did not require an external supply of energy at all (see his publication 1962). In 1978, Doctor of Technical Sciences V. Zysin was issued auth. St. No. 591667 for a really working non-power refrigerator that produces cold due to the heat of the cooled bodies. But ... refrigerators were discontinued and "forgotten."

    In 1960, Stovbunenko, on whose development a special decision was made by the military-industrial complex, demonstrated his electric motors in an old Moskvich, which made it possible to drive around the city all day long on the energy of an ordinary battery.
    A number of commercially available machines have a KPI of more than one. For example, the NETI-2K electric breaker has a KPI for converting electrical energy into mechanical energy equal to 4,5.
    In the spiritual community (Linden, Switzerland), since 1980, Bauman's electrostatic machines with a total capacity of 750 kW have been operating, providing all the household needs of the village. Thus, in 1980, a settlement appeared in the world, which once and for all solved all energy problems, expelling both fossil fuels and all the myths about the "crisis" beyond the threshold.
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre April 15 2014 12: 00
      0
      Mindless ... no words ...
      Tell me, illiterate, what is KPI?
      1. postman
        postman April 15 2014 12: 37
        +2
        Quote: abrakadabre
        Tell me, illiterate, what is KPI?

        Key performance indicators - Managery henna, not related to mechanics
      2. Alex
        Alex 8 July 2014 19: 42
        +2
        Quote: abrakadabre
        Tell me, illiterate, what is KPI?
        I think so, energy conversion coefficient... This is such a pseudoscientific term in order not to use the well-known efficiency factor. Pseudoscience is characterized by the use of "new scientific" terminology.
    2. Morgan
      Morgan April 15 2014 12: 13
      +2
      Efficiency greater than one? !! Violation of the laws of thermodynamics is punishable by imprisonment in a psychiatric hospital, closer to the Napoleons and aliens from Betelgeuse. Teach physics, sir ...
      1. alleksSalut4507
        alleksSalut4507 April 22 2014 04: 53
        -1
        Once, after a meeting with scientists, the Prime Minister of the USSR refused to buy Japanese inventions for $ 100 million, including those with an efficiency of more than 1, not recommended for implementation.
    3. postman
      postman April 15 2014 12: 59
      +4
      Quote: Nitarius
      Mustache has long been!

      It is necessary to school, urgently ... as the Pakistanis:
      Pakistan saves itself - and the whole world at the same time - from the fuel crisis

      Agha Vakar Ahmad created special device ( fool ), which splits water into hydrogen and oxygen by electrolysis and can be installed on any internal combustion engine. Which, incidentally, was demonstrated to Pakistani scientists and experts from the Ministry of Energy.

      Quote: Nitarius
      adding some simple and cheap chemicals (a few drops per bucket of water) to plain water.

      "Flocks of ideas fluttered senselessly in the air" (c) A. and B. Strugatsky
      1.add potassium metal

      2.add cesium
      3. Why trifle? micrograms France will be enough
      universal formula:
      2M + 2H2O = 2M aq + 2OHaq + H2 ,
      M + 2H2O = M2 + 2OH + H2.

      ==============
      you can "ride" until you drop
      1. Kadavercianin
        Kadavercianin April 15 2014 14: 31
        +3
        lol thanks neighing, the cost of such a simple fuel, as well as its availability is simply amazing. Further, the inventors of fluorine as an oxidizing agent will offer, and lithium as a fuel.
        Hmm ..... People do not give rest to the laurels of the creator of the perpetual motion machine or some other joy in this spirit, it’s a pity that most often their inventions are worth nothing but the desire to receive dough or amuse pride
    4. Alex
      Alex 8 July 2014 19: 40
      +2
      You know, Nitarius, this is too much. Refrigerators that violate the second law of thermodynamics, jack hammers that violate the law of conservation of energy, mythical divine attitudes ... I thought that we still had education.
  11. Mizhgan
    Mizhgan April 15 2014 10: 49
    +2
    The efficiency of this technology is in question. Well, now they will not be dragging a tacker, but a floating nuclear power plant. Radish horseradish is not sweeter.
  12. Svetovod
    Svetovod April 15 2014 11: 06
    +2
    Quote: atarix
    remake all the water in Lutz ...
    Kyu!


    God forbid. Lutz-Oil privatizes all water, including underground water, and so the planet is half-dead from trade. The main thing is not to export outside the planet, and so the steam will again become water.
    Kin-Dza-Dza is not an easy movie.
  13. Bogdarin
    Bogdarin April 15 2014 11: 20
    +4
    ETHERS of carbonic acid in sea water. This is the finish. Maybe it’s worth introducing at least a minimal screening of articles on the subject of epic nonsense in the composition?
  14. sv68
    sv68 April 15 2014 12: 03
    0
    oh these fairy tales oh these fairy tales. similar projects existed in the USSR but they were canceled due to the terrible high cost. I still worked in 94 with a former engineer from a private license plate. He talked about trying to create cheap fuel from water, so if you discard the falsification of results for squeezing money, such fuel it will cost more than gold at times. because fuel must have a high percentage and the problem of increased salinity of certain places in the seas and oceans is also not solved
    1. alleksSalut4507
      alleksSalut4507 April 22 2014 04: 59
      -2
      in the seventies, the French at the exhibition showed a tank engine running on water.
      1. Alex
        Alex 8 July 2014 19: 45
        +3
        Quote: alleksSalut4507
        in the seventies, the French at the exhibition showed a tank engine running on water.
        And not on the holy spirit? Well, you really are foolish. Why would France fight for oil and gas?
  15. RuslanNN
    RuslanNN April 15 2014 13: 21
    +1
    something I lagged behind seems to be from the world. The law of conservation of energy has already been canceled? How much energy is needed to get hydrogen and CO2 from water?
    1. Alex
      Alex 8 July 2014 20: 03
      +3
      Quote: RuslanNN
      How much energy is needed to get hydrogen and CO2 from water?

      CO2 can be obtained by physical methods, it is there in a dissolved state. The specific energy consumption depends on the method.
      And hydrogen is obtained from water by electrolysis and energy is calculated according to the Faraday law m = kIt, where m is the mass of hydrogen, I is the current strength, t is time. Considering that the voltage on the bath is usually of the order of 10 V DC (rectification efficiency about 60%), the total amount of energy on 1 kg of hydrogen will be approximately equal to E = UIt = U / (k * 0,6) per 1 g (11.2 l) hydrogen.
      It is possible to decompose water thermally (when heated above 1010 C). Excluding losses for maintaining heat (this also depends on design features), energy consumption will be 242 kJ / mol (i.e., for 2 g (22,4 L) of hydrogen). (reference book "Constants of inorganic substances" R. A. Lidin, L. L. Andreeva, V. A. Molochko)
  16. archi.sailor
    archi.sailor April 15 2014 14: 17
    +2
    Quote: inkass_98
    I, of course, am not an expert, but is it not easier then to switch to hydrogen engines or to an engine already in fuel cells than to deal first with the decomposition of water, then with the synthesis of hydrocarbon fuel? In the case of decomposition of water into hydrogen and oxygen and the use of engines using this fuel, the environmental component will be much higher, only water and CO at the outlet. In my opinion, this is another cut of the budget dough with a good prospect for 7-10 of the coming years. And then according to Nasruddin, someone will die, and the project will be quietly covered.

    that's just ripped off the tongue, dear. hi Plus, I have the same opinion. Too the whole operation is costly (energetically), isn’t it easier immediately, as indicated above
  17. Alex_T
    Alex_T April 15 2014 14: 37
    +1
    It seems today is not April 1, why print fairy tales?
  18. Rostislav
    Rostislav April 15 2014 15: 02
    +1
    The indicated cost of fuel in the amount of 8-16 cents / liter, which is much lower than in oil refining, raises doubts. Plants on NP will go bankrupt. And the "green" joy - oil production can be reduced. For once, the environmentalists will rejoice together with the military.
  19. wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 April 15 2014 16: 58
    +1
    Do these "Kyu" want the Earth to be like Plyuk? stop fool

  20. Bayonet
    Bayonet April 15 2014 20: 53
    0
    If this is brought to mind, a nuclear carrier could provide fuel for the aircraft based on it.
  21. Asan Ata
    Asan Ata April 15 2014 23: 24
    0
    Why is everything so complicated? It’s just enough to supply the entire group of security ships with cables from the aircraft carrier reactor, for example. In an emergency, the environment ships go over to their diesel engines, and that’s it. And so the installation for the synthesis of fuel will occupy a good half of the aircraft carrier.
  22. Signaller
    Signaller April 19 2014 18: 17
    0
    It seems to me, you just need to let Americans go ahead with the development of this technology, and then just slamzit all this with them and set up their installation. Why invest in the unknown ????. They will find ways to produce fuel, they will develop the installation, solve the problems of cheapening and increasing efficiency. Here we will approach our Abel to them.
  23. Peacemaker
    Peacemaker April 25 2014 14: 46
    0
    Somewhere on the Internet I saw an article on the sale of hydrogen fuel cells safe and environmentally friendly ... Why puzzle over when everything is much simpler
    ?
    1. Alex
      Alex 8 July 2014 20: 07
      +3
      Quote: Peacemaker
      Somewhere on the Internet I saw an article on the sale of hydrogen fuel cells safe and environmentally friendly ... Why puzzle over when everything is much simpler?
      Dear, you do not confuse hydrogen fuel cells and so on. TE is a device for DIRECTly converting the energy of chemical bonds into electrical energy no more. An analogue of a conventional mobile phone battery. How many of them will be needed to power an aircraft carrier?
  24. Peacemaker
    Peacemaker April 25 2014 15: 00
    0
    Here is the link: http://lavent.ru/vodorodnye-toplivnye-elementy/
  25. BM-13
    BM-13 10 July 2014 23: 03
    +2
    All this venture gives a little another bluff. Of course, you can get cheese from dumplings, but what's the point?
  26. Tishka
    Tishka 4 March 2015 15: 57
    0
    I, unfortunately, are not a chemist. and not a physicist, but I bought one interesting unit here. which, after refueling with water, and an inserted plug, in a conventional outlet, gives out a torch. with a temperature of 8 degrees Celsius, according to the developer. It’s good to cut steel, bearings, too, just at the time, how many problems there were, with cutting clips, with a crumbling bearing. So, the idea is quite interesting, by the way, it doesn’t consume much energy, and you don’t need to order cylinders with acetylene and oxygen, for welding, and the device itself, not big, fits in a bag quite easily, and it’s easy to carry on your shoulder. The main principle of a turbine is to inject kerosene into compressed atmospheric air, set fire, and heat up the supplied air during combustion, and the gas that is produced by combustion, which in turn rotates the blades of the hot region of the turbine. Here the people are smart, if possible. then you can calculate how many times the air volume will increase, when it is heated, even if it is up to 000 degrees. and the work done by him, at a cost of food, like a 4000-watt bulb per hour. The only minus noted is high burner heating. after 60 minutes of work, it’s difficult to keep even through the canvas gloves.