Hey Sup Forums I don't know much about science but I have this crazy idea...

Hey Sup Forums I don't know much about science but I have this crazy idea. Oil comes from dinosaur bones they have undergone high pressure and extreme heat from being far underground eventually turning it into oil and natural gases right? What if we could make a machine that could replicate the process faster resulting in an almost unlimited amount of energy?

Other urls found in this thread:

discovermagazine.com/2016/janfeb/15-welcome-to-the-sixth-mass-extinction
ssl.toyota.com/mirai/gallery.html
youtube.com/watch?v=HQ9Fhd7P_HA
ftmdaily.com/preparing-for-the-collapse-of-the-petrodollar-system/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

we dont have dinosaurs to crush up but we could probably substitute for them with poor people.

>I don't know much about science
Which is why this idea is fundamentally and irreparably flawed.

Cow bones

the amount of energy it would take to sustain this reaction alone would probably not be greater than the energy after the fact.

What's wrong with it though?

What if we used just enough so that it takes a while

Oil does not come from dinosaurs, it comes from plant materials that could not be dissolved/eaten away by bacteria when they existed and got buried and had pressure and heat on it for millennia.

As for replicating it, we have bacteria now that can do it but they don't make nearly enough oil by-product to make any meaningful impact. Also, continued dispersal of carbon dioxide and other gasses into the atmosphere from automobiles/power plants (as well as extreme amounts of methane from livestocks) coupled with mass deforestation has begun the Sixth Mass Extinction already

discovermagazine.com/2016/janfeb/15-welcome-to-the-sixth-mass-extinction

So exacerbating the issue will only lead to a quicker demise of not only numerous animal and plant species but also possibly humanity.

Your question is what hydrogen engines are the solution to.

This exist already, among other forms of free energy. Try reading about science a little and not thinking about it before you know anything about it.
Good day

Core concept?

By the fundamental laws of thermodynamics, all fuels require more energy to create than they produce when consumed.

In the case of fossil fuels such as coal, oil etc. this excess energy was provided from millions of years of sunlight. Doing it faster would require us to spend more energy than we'd get form the product.

Ah shit that's a good response I can't really say much to argue that

Sorry bro it's like 4 in the morning and I got the idea from watching hydraulic press videos

The energy to make the original plants and animals came from sunlight but the pressure and heat came from radioactive decay inside the earth.

The hydraulic press uses far more energy than it puts into the things it's crushing.

Negro Recycling Program when?

This user is actually right I think at least, there's already cars and shit using this technology. Water is the only biproduct though?

ssl.toyota.com/mirai/gallery.html

Some of the heat came from the core, but plenty of the pressure and heat came from simply being moved down below other materials, which is a process driven by weather, which is a process driven by the sun (and the moon too).

>What if we could make a machine that could replicate the process faster resulting in an almost unlimited amount of energy?

You probably could, but it would take more energy to process everything than the energy you would get out.

Water and some mild trace elements at worst (usually just some plastics and metals that are caused from wear and tear in the engine, not the actual hydrogen though).

And then when you want to convert the water back into fuel, you just run a circuit through it.

youtube.com/watch?v=HQ9Fhd7P_HA

The advantage is a way to chemically store energy. It is not an energy harvesting technique, unless there happens to be large sources of hydrogen and oxygen gas available.

Oxygen is somewhat plentiful, but the amount of methane produced each year is skyrocketing. Hell, most of the hydrogen for the fuel cells that the cars run on are gained from hydrogen which is quite easily acquired.

OP - You are 100% correct, you don't know much about science. Nor oil for that matter. Nor that bones are made of calcium and and oil from carbon. The fact they both begin with a C does not make them the same thing.

I'm sorry OP, but I know a lot about science, and for the good of Darwin and the whole human species, NEVER BREED!!!

Does it help that I got the idea from watching hydraulic press videos on YouTube?

It's a pretty good system. There's probably some way to cheaply extract hydrogen gas off of limestone or something by just adding the right solution + catalyst mix, and letting it dissolve. Since we have an abundance of Oxygen, and Hydrogen is *literally* the single most abundant element in the known universe, we're set!

Up until humanity goes ham on this technology, burns up all the O2 and suffocates.

Most of the problems with technology at this point isn't actually technical; it's the fact that applying it to modern civilization requires a death wish, at the rate they go completely out of control with what they do have.

See: Fukushima.

Very interesting stuff. Why isn't this used more widespread? It seems like the advantages of storing energy in chemical form outweigh everything associated.

This thech alredy exists somewhat, used to produce e-disel.
but as someone alredy pointed out its an expensive prosses and dificulty producing in the amount nessesery therefore not commeraly viable

Because competition with petrol companies is made difficult by the fact that the global currency is backed by USD. Thus anyone who wants to establish non-petrol based technology either needs the permission of the banking cartels who run this racket, or to develop it without using USD to fund their business.

The banking cartels aren't going to give permission to develop non-petrol based energy systems that would threaten to destabilize the value of the USD petrodollar, since the banking cartels entire business is based on the value of the USD petrodollar. So, you get half backed non-petrol based technologies that are *just* good enough to not replace gasoline, and usually associated in some way with the banking cartels, or volunteer programs that have a suspicious track record of having their proper vandalized and notes set on fire.

Them's the breaks, user. Hydrolysis of water is *ancient* technology, going back to like steam engines and shit.

If you want to use oxygen and hydrogen as fuel, seperating wather is possible in a number of ways.

electronalisys
extreme heat(mostly used)

The problem is the energy losses in separating is far greater then the energy you get out of it

That seems to be the main problem with every alternative fuel source

tinfoil hat engaged

I mean, if you do it right the energy loss between converting states should be exactly 0.

How efficient you can make a thing is between you and your own mind, but 99% efficiency isn't rare in electrolysis these days. But yes. Converting back and forth between two states repeatedly tends to leak heat. It's only a method of harvesting energy, if one has a source of hydrogen and oxygen, or unless there's some ambient energy that water absorbs, raising it to a potential energy level, which further allows it to separate into hydrogen and oxygen gas with energy required than the amount of energy which burning the two gases would release.

The jury's still out on that one. To my knowledge, no consensus regarding the total aggregate sum of all energy that water can absorb present in the universe has been sufficiently charted.

aka Elon musk then. that does seem like a logical explanation though.

>should be exactly zero
No, it shouldn't. A perfect heat machine is literally physically impossible.

It is, but some still has good potential like electric for example.
Using "renuable energy" like wind, wather and solar for producin it where viable.

The main problem with electric veicles is unfortionally distanse and recharge time

Nice trips.

You should try reading news some time.

ftmdaily.com/preparing-for-the-collapse-of-the-petrodollar-system/

Knowledge about the relationship between the U.S.'s banking cartels and the petroleum businesses, particularly with partnerships in Saudi Arabia, already passed into the category of "old news" awhile ago. It hasn't been "tin foil hattery" in like... years. Decades even?

Regarding the workshops of various inventors that frequently get burned--I didn't mean to imply any kind of competition. Just that statistically it happens with a 100% frequency once discovered by aforementioned cartels. This could just all be bad luck. Either way, it's the reason why independent volunteer based organizations haven't arrived at non-petroleum based energy components for engines that can compete with petroleum based energy systems.

Bad luck or no, if non-petroleum based energy system inventors' labs all get wrecked, then there's no progress made in that direction, except by petroleum companies.

rape seed oil

doh!

Of course oil and banks are tied, that's not what I'm arguing. It's the idea that better technology exists but is always conveniently suppressed with 100% efficiency. Keeping secrets is the thing that all of humanity is worst at, no conspiracies on a global scale ever have or ever will exist.

Not true. In some cases it's over unity. If you deal a deck of shuffled cards out, eventually some of them are going to be of consecutive order, and of the same suit. What you actually mean to say is that it would be physically impossible if this *never* happened, since that in itself would be a violation of entropy.

If you knew that a deck of cards *never* happened to randomly order itself, then you could rely on that fact, to assume the next consecutive sequence of order (for instance a 7 and 9 of hearts), know that *that* never happens, and so on throughout the whole deck. Ergo, given random or even chaotic entropy states, a system must resemble a perfect heat machine, or even an over unity machine more than none of the time. (But usually less than all of it.)

It really just depends on how pedantic you want to get.

No secrets here. I just told you about a more superior technology than petroleum, didn't I?

If you want to test it, go ahead and go build some hydrogen engines, and count the days before someone comes back to wreck your shit, and take your notebook. Think of it as a falsifiable, scientific experiment.

Because you know what's even harder than keeping secrets right now? Getting funding using the very money whose value depends on you not devaluing it with the technology you intend to market with said funds.

Yeah, there's totally nobody funding that exact research in universities. There are plenty of scientists and engineers who want to help but darn, would you look at that, literally none of them can get funding from anyone at all, certainly not the public that would love that research to go ahead. How unfortunate. Wouldn't it be nice if the banks didn't magically control all money at all levels rather than just some of it at some levels?

In theoty converting could be made loss free but in practice no. there will allwais be losses converting.
In eletrolysis there are still heavy loss duo to unwanted heat and the prosses itself eats away the nodes used

You fucking think youre the first to think about that? Theres a reason its not being done atm.

Provided they don't devalue the USD petrodollar, there's no harm in developing non-petrol based energy systems.

The original asked, which you lost track of like three exchanges ago, is "why isn't this technology MORE popular?"

As I've said. As long as it's less popular than petrol, no harm done. The moment it becomes more popular, then the entire U.S. economy, and global economy really, will shake. That means our military, our hospitals, our education system, which ties in nicely with those same universities who are toying around with pet models of hydrogen engines, which is completely different than mass producing an engine line that uses such.

It needn't matter if there's an intentional conspiracy arranging these events. *I* see it for what it is, and what it is that you can't fund a research using the very money that said research would invalidate. No more than a snake can eat its tail, or entropy can be made to run in reverse.

It's simple physics, applied to the economic situation that's relevant to prospect of the invention of energy systems in the fist place. You can think of it as macro physics, if you like. Economics. Neat stuff.

That's one way to look at it.

Total energy input for this process > Net gain

when you put gas in a generator. As it generates electricity.

Do you get
1. more electricity energy than gas energy burned
2. same amount of electricity energy as gas energy burned.
3. less electricity energy as gas energy burned.

If your answer is anything but 3. Youre retarded.

Simple fact, it would take more energy to make the oil, than what the energy of the oil could eventually produce.
That is why oil is a valuable commodity. It'is basically free energy, as the process was done naturally.