Rechargeable Batteries with 20 year life span
Quote from: shutter give it some power...
... generated by solar panels.
The chemistry is infant school stuff, yes, but in the grown up world, the efficiency of the energy put in to split the H2O up into H2 and O is pretty poor, put 100% energy in and you get about 50% back as it's a 2:1 ratio (2 parts energy in, 1 part returned)... 
I have one of these hydrogen fuel cell toy car kits somewhere:
http://www.gizmag.com/go/5780/
Took about a week to generate enough H2 from solar to run it for about 5 minutes, scale that up and, well, it's not particularly effective or efficient...
Yes the hydrogen fuel cell itself is great for generating power, BUT, if you generate it from breaking up distilled water, it's going to take a lot more energy to accomplish than what you'll get back, if it were that easy, then we'd have sorted the energy crisis a looooooong time ago, but as it stands, it's one of those "You cannae change the laws o' physics Jim" things due to the effect of ever diminishing returns (100% in, 50% out, 50% in, 25% out, 25% in, 12.5% out, in other words, a losing battle), and if you want to get the most efficiently extracted hydrogen to fuel your cell, you have to take it from petrochemicals, which is about as green as tyre burning...
And if you're using solar panels to split water into H2 and O to fuel a cell to power a charger to recharge a phone, erm, skip the splitting & fuelling, charge your phone right off the solar panel, I do that myself, you get far fewer losses that way...
Physics; It's the Law.
I have one of these hydrogen fuel cell toy car kits somewhere:
http://www.gizmag.com/go/5780/
Took about a week to generate enough H2 from solar to run it for about 5 minutes, scale that up and, well, it's not particularly effective or efficient...
Yes the hydrogen fuel cell itself is great for generating power, BUT, if you generate it from breaking up distilled water, it's going to take a lot more energy to accomplish than what you'll get back, if it were that easy, then we'd have sorted the energy crisis a looooooong time ago, but as it stands, it's one of those "You cannae change the laws o' physics Jim" things due to the effect of ever diminishing returns (100% in, 50% out, 50% in, 25% out, 25% in, 12.5% out, in other words, a losing battle), and if you want to get the most efficiently extracted hydrogen to fuel your cell, you have to take it from petrochemicals, which is about as green as tyre burning...
And if you're using solar panels to split water into H2 and O to fuel a cell to power a charger to recharge a phone, erm, skip the splitting & fuelling, charge your phone right off the solar panel, I do that myself, you get far fewer losses that way...
Physics; It's the Law.
@twucvbloke
Interestingly there is the "sulphur iodine" process for large scale manufacturing of hydrogen.
This is catalytically enhanced thermal dissociation of water using high temperature heat into hydrogen and oxygen. It has been proposed for use with nuclear reactors and solar ovens
@petecove44. As a conversion process I think batteries are better than what you have efficiency wise
Interestingly there is the "sulphur iodine" process for large scale manufacturing of hydrogen.
This is catalytically enhanced thermal dissociation of water using high temperature heat into hydrogen and oxygen. It has been proposed for use with nuclear reactors and solar ovens
@petecove44. As a conversion process I think batteries are better than what you have efficiency wise
Has anyone here any experience/recommendations for recharging AA/AAA batteries from a 12V supply. When away in the caravan (without electric hookup) I'd like to be able to recharge batteries occasionally. I already have a solar panel to help keep the leisure battery topped up.
The trouble with those is I'll lose power in the inverter and again on the charger. I've seen one or two battery chargers for use in a car which work straight off the 12V which should be more efficient. I was hoping someone might know about these.
Quote from: PeterLoftus @twucvbloke
Interestingly there is the "sulphur iodine" process for large scale manufacturing of hydrogen.
This is catalytically enhanced thermal dissociation of water using high temperature heat into hydrogen and oxygen. It has been proposed for use with nuclear reactors and solar ovens
@petecove44. As a conversion process I think batteries are better than what you have efficiency wise
Maybe, Maybe not time will tell as I have not really had a chance to test them all together yet at the same time. I do more than charge my phone but the reactor is the last resort when the battery packs are depleted. For the gear I carry I have a few 50,000mAh packs (probably 30000 in reality) and the reactor which has it's own 3800MaH battery in it - obviously use as storage from the output also but being able to power everything and still fill up the pack means I can use it and then recharge it all and use it - so getting even more life.
You are all probably sat there thinking "where the hell are you when you do this in a cave?" You wouldn't be far wrong either
Quote from: petecov44 People who try get murdered by the big companies because it would end their profits. This is why the liked of Rossi are in hiding in secret locations but are still bringing out their cold fusion tech.
You actually believe that rubbish?? The reason these people go "into hiding" is because the things they're "developing" do not work!! If I created something, made bold claims about that could not be backed up scientifically, I'd go into hiding to escape the ridicule from intelligent people who can see that these creations are blatantly rubbish!! The only people who actually believe in the conspiracy theories are the ones who wear foil hats and smoke cannabis...
Over-unity is impossible, there is no way in this universe that you can put 100% energy and get 110% back, it's just completely impossible...
I doubt the £30 figure, as that covers my quarterly standing charge outright, you'd have to be powering everything off-grid (regardless of technologies involved) to be only paying a standing charge and not have anything consuming anything, infact, if you're only paying the standing charge, why are you even connected up at all? Save yourself more money, call up your supplier and have them cut you off the grid entirely and save yourself £120 more a year...
The way you're doing things from how you describe though is very inefficient, imagine if you will, a power station using steam to drive a turbine, the turbine drives a generator, the generator charges a battery, the battery then powers a motor, the motor drives another generator, generator drives the grid, that's basically what you have there, creating excessive losses where none should exist, where in reality (and what smart people do) is increase efficiency and skip the wasteful steps so that steam drives the turbine that drives the generator that drives the grid, just as you could use solar to charge a battery to drive your device(s), that alone would save a lot of time and quite literally a lot of energy...
Simple primary-school maths on turning water into H2 and O states that for every 1 Amp of electricity you use, you only get 0.5 Amps equivalent returned, depending on the efficiency of your fuel cell. With some simple figures, using batteries charged via solar means to recharge the battery, you have to put in 120% of the capacity of the battery to fill it to 100% charge, so a 50Ah SLA battery for example needs 60Ah to charge, then half of that 60Ah used to charge the battery is thrown out the window as waste oxygen in your generator, so you get 30Ah lost, but as the battery only has 50Ah to give, then it's 25Ah of equivalent power left over when the H2 is run through the fuel cell assuming 100% efficiency (impossible) but the actual figure would be far less...
To me, I'd say that sticking to what the battery has stored in it is much more efficient, and not to mention higher capacity too, as-is you're basically wasting your money, I'd be very interested to know how much you've spent on all this equipment to compare it to the average household electricity bill...
The way you're doing things from how you describe though is very inefficient, imagine if you will, a power station using steam to drive a turbine, the turbine drives a generator, the generator charges a battery, the battery then powers a motor, the motor drives another generator, generator drives the grid, that's basically what you have there, creating excessive losses where none should exist, where in reality (and what smart people do) is increase efficiency and skip the wasteful steps so that steam drives the turbine that drives the generator that drives the grid, just as you could use solar to charge a battery to drive your device(s), that alone would save a lot of time and quite literally a lot of energy...
Simple primary-school maths on turning water into H2 and O states that for every 1 Amp of electricity you use, you only get 0.5 Amps equivalent returned, depending on the efficiency of your fuel cell. With some simple figures, using batteries charged via solar means to recharge the battery, you have to put in 120% of the capacity of the battery to fill it to 100% charge, so a 50Ah SLA battery for example needs 60Ah to charge, then half of that 60Ah used to charge the battery is thrown out the window as waste oxygen in your generator, so you get 30Ah lost, but as the battery only has 50Ah to give, then it's 25Ah of equivalent power left over when the H2 is run through the fuel cell assuming 100% efficiency (impossible) but the actual figure would be far less...
To me, I'd say that sticking to what the battery has stored in it is much more efficient, and not to mention higher capacity too, as-is you're basically wasting your money, I'd be very interested to know how much you've spent on all this equipment to compare it to the average household electricity bill...
Thanks, you've just confirmed that you're not telling the truth about your setup. How can I tell? Well, as soon as someone starts using profanity (even if censored by the forum) in a debate when someone asks for proof of what you're doing, then they know they've been found out and can't think of anything else to say...
And I couldn't care less if you sit in the dark, you've got your priorities sorted it seems, personally though I'd pay the electricity bill first then have internet access, not the other way round, simple logic...
And I couldn't care less if you sit in the dark, you've got your priorities sorted it seems, personally though I'd pay the electricity bill first then have internet access, not the other way round, simple logic...