Jump to content

Turning Fresh Air and Water into Petrol. I knew it was possible!


Recommended Posts

I agree that the amount of energy used to 'make' this fuel is going to be a lot more that the fuel itself will be able to generate.

 

However, the fuel itself will, currently, be much more useful in vehicles than the 'green' energy used to create it.

 

Until electric vehicles can be recharged quickly (minutes not hours), then the internal combustion engine will remain king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, tell ya what. here's a link to the company. I suggest you send them a nice polite email and tell them they're wasting their time, cos you know better!

 

http://www.airfuelsynthesis.com/

 

Oh and thanks for the link to the £37.59 book. I'll order it right away!...NOT!

 

Tell ya what pete - there is this thing called a library. It's attached to the Uni, and they've got a cople of dozen copies they will let you go in and read if you like.

 

Now I suggest you drop the attitude and stop looking like a prat. If you want to debate a scientific point, when you have no apparant appreciation of the underlying science you are only ever going to end up with egg all over yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell ya what pete - there is this thing called a library. It's attached to the Uni, and they've got a cople of dozen copies they will let you go in and read if you like.

 

Now I suggest you drop the attitude and stop looking like a prat. If you want to debate a scientific point, when you have no apparant appreciation of the underlying science you are only ever going to end up with egg all over yourself.

 

I didn't post the thread to have a science lesson or to debate any scientific point. I saw the article and thought it was a good idea. Simple as that. Nothing complicated or obscure.

 

Then all I get is some BOD come on sprouting scientific principles, which I really can't be bothered with.

 

If the idea is so bad then YOU tell the company not to waste it's time in such a worthless project!

 

Yes I have got an attitude, I don't like being the brunt of your superiority complex. I'm not pretending to be a scientist, I never have.

 

I don't expect to make a post and for you to come on here and ridicule me. I'm not the one doing the research.

 

Here's the link. You'll find the email address on the home page!

http://www.airfuelsynthesis.com/home.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Your very first post seems to doubt that as you raised the previous thread up. You said that this was as good as running a car on fresh air - if that's not starting a scientific debate I don't know what is.

 

You then decided, post #12 btw, when the consensus was against you to engage in a little bit of attack on my integrity and credibility, which you continued in post #15 and then in #21 decided that it's just best to start the abuse for real.

 

So I'll say it plain. You are acting like a spoilt child, throwing his toys out all because someone doesnt agree with him. It's pathetic and demeans you. You could have chosen to engage in the debate and gain a better understanding and appreciate how this process may be useful, but instead you decide it's finger in the ear, this is oh so hard for me.

 

Your loss. Just remember that mediocrity is a vice of the doomed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the amount of energy used to 'make' this fuel is going to be a lot more that the fuel itself will be able to generate.

 

However, the fuel itself will, currently, be much more useful in vehicles than the 'green' energy used to create it.

 

Until electric vehicles can be recharged quickly (minutes not hours), then the internal combustion engine will remain king.

 

They have batteries that can do that now - 10% to 90% charge in about six minutes. That's viable to use it in a plutonium economy. The probelm, as ever is cost - although new tech usually does end up getting cheaper real fast if it is of any use at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Your very first post seems to doubt that as you raised the previous thread up. You said that this was as good as running a car on fresh air - if that's not starting a scientific debate I don't know what is.

 

You then decided, post #12 btw, when the consensus was against you to engage in a little bit of attack on my integrity and credibility, which you continued in post #15 and then in #21 decided that it's just best to start the abuse for real.

 

So I'll say it plain. You are acting like a spoilt child, throwing his toys out all because someone doesnt agree with him. It's pathetic and demeans you. You could have chosen to engage in the debate and gain a better understanding and appreciate how this process may be useful, but instead you decide it's finger in the ear, this is oh so hard for me.

 

Your loss. Just remember that mediocrity is a vice of the doomed.

I bet you're a bundle of fun in the pub - let it go now, you're beginning to bore everyone! :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.