Thorium questions?

[charles2,david000k]

I spent half my working life as an engineer, half as a high school teacher. I taught mostly at independent schools, but had some experience in public schools. At one of the public schools, the students in one class were learning how to make change. A colleague informed me the same students "learned" making change year after year. I never quite understood that. Based on my experience shopping, there are far too many young people who never do learn how to make change - but if you can figure out how to patent an invention later I guess that more than makes up.

Learning how to cook is a useful skill - one that one would hope is learned in the home. Chemistry I found to be the toughest subject, physics my favorite. You were part of No Child Left Behind - I was part of New Math. I liked New Math, but it was scrapped as a failure, like adoption of the metric system. Go figure.

Change like the TV cost $4367.97 and you gave the cashier $5462.31 how much should you get back change $1094.34 if so that is why I don't complain when someone hacks the bank system people invest way too much trust in the banks or the voter is screwed because they made the change to remove ballot initiative stripping most areas of voters right to petition out unjust laws by pushing a issue to a vote.

[charles2,david000k]

An please don't jump me on my description of how a reactor works I know I am wrong with how the rod heat up. I thought that you can't make more energy with less energy. the whole thing is mind boggling to me.

[inetdog]

An please don't jump me on my description of how a reactor works I know I am wrong with how the rod heat up. I thought that you can't make more energy with less energy. the whole thing is mind boggling to me.

No problem. A nuclear reactor gets energy by transforming one isotope of one element (the nucleus part) to a different isotope and element. The new element is more stable and hence has less available energy stored in the strong nuclear force. The difference in energy goes into gamma and particle radiation which in turn gets converted into heat.

The thorium itself is just another kind of nuclear fuel, one that is not on its own weaponizable. But the byproducts of the reaction are weaponizable, so the "leftovers" need to be strictly controlled.
And regardless of the fuel, you are not going to have a nuclear reactor, with its shielding and thermal power conversion machinery, in your home or car any time soon. If ever.

[Living Large]

Now if there was a SAFE way of using Thorium in a home or automobile setting to make power that would be interesting.

That's what I meant when I said there is no practical way to make power with Thorium - for the individual. You aren't going to have your own nuclear reactor. Safety is a priority when selecting fuels - look at the issues with commercializing hydrogen powered vehicles.

[charles2,david000k]

Is it possible to mix gases like methane and hydrogen in order to make it easier to store the hydrogen or add a carbon atom to the hydrogen and make methane? I ask becuase I heard it explained once as hydrogen is most happy when it has 4 hydrogen bonded to 1 carbon but that would be methane at that point and easier to store.

[Sunking]

Is it possible to mix gases like methane and hydrogen in order to make it easier to store the hydrogen or add a carbon atom to the hydrogen and make methane? I ask becuase I heard it explained once as hydrogen is most happy when it has 4 hydrogen bonded to 1 carbon but that would be methane at that point and easier to store.

Where are you going to get the hydrogen? It takes a chit load of energy and money to make hydrogen as we have already discussed. Th emost efficient way to make Hydrogen is from Natural Gas.

Do you know what Natural Gas is? Methane See any problem with that. You are saying take 2 units of Natural Gas to make 1 unit of Hydrogen. So already you have wasted 50% of your energy you started with Natural Gas to make synthetic Natural Gas.

But that is not the end of waste. Now you have to convert or combine the hydrogen and carbon. It can be done with the Sabatier process. You now need a source of Nickel Silver which is expensive and wasteful. Again you have huge energy losses in the conversion You are now wasting 10 units of energy to make 1 unit of energy.

Think of it this way. You give me $10 today, and tomorrow I give you $1 back and call it an even trade. Do want any part of that deal? Of course not. So what in effect you are doing is take 10 units of Natural Gas to make 1 unit of Natural Gas. Natural Gas is super abundant and dirt cheap.

Remember hydrogen is not a fuel source. It is a Carrier of energy with huge energy losses. Any Carrier of energy is a multiple of the source fuel used to make it. In this case 10 units of NG to make 1 unit of NG. Not only do you waste 90% of your source fuel, it cost more than 10 times what the source fuel NG cost you to make NG gas from. See any problem with that?

Let's cut to the chase. A Hydrogen economy is bankruptcy and DOA.

Now a fun Factoid for you or Q&A.

Q. What is Hydrogen converted to when it burns? In other words what are hydrogen ashes after it burns?

A. WATER

There is a much better and cheaper way to make Methane aka NG. Biogas, or Sewer Gas. In fact several cities make natural gas to generate electricity. They take your garbage, let it rot to make Biogas. When you fart, it is Methane aka NG. Enviro wacko's want cattle destroyed because cattle produces a chit load of Methane which is a green house gas.

[inetdog]

Is it possible to mix gases like methane and hydrogen in order to make it easier to store the hydrogen or add a carbon atom to the hydrogen and make methane? I ask becuase I heard it explained once as hydrogen is most happy when it has 4 hydrogen bonded to 1 carbon but that would be methane at that point and easier to store.

One of the arguments used in favor of hydrogen fuel systems (leaving out for the moment the question of how to get the hydrogen) is that the only combustion product is H2O, water. If you "store" the hydrogen in the form of methane, then the primary combustion products are H2O and CO2. That is still better than the hydrogen to carbon ratio in oil, and, of course, far worse than the zero ratio in burning coal. But it is not the same as burning pure hydrogen.

Are you aware of the difference between a chemical compound and a mixture?

[charles2,david000k]

Where are you going to get the hydrogen? It takes a chit load of energy and money to make hydrogen as we have already discussed. Th emost efficient way to make Hydrogen is from Natural Gas.

Do you know what Natural Gas is? Methane See any problem with that. You are saying take 2 units of Natural Gas to make 1 unit of Hydrogen. So already you have wasted 50% of your energy you started with Natural Gas to make synthetic Natural Gas.

But that is not the end of waste. Now you have to convert or combine the hydrogen and carbon. It can be done with the Sabatier process. You now need a source of Nickel Silver which is expensive and wasteful. Again you have huge energy losses in the conversion You are now wasting 10 units of energy to make 1 unit of energy.

Think of it this way. You give me $10 today, and tomorrow I give you $1 back and call it an even trade. Do want any part of that deal? Of course not. So what in effect you are doing is take 10 units of Natural Gas to make 1 unit of Natural Gas. Natural Gas is super abundant and dirt cheap.

Remember hydrogen is not a fuel source. It is a Carrier of energy with huge energy losses. Any Carrier of energy is a multiple of the source fuel used to make it. In this case 10 units of NG to make 1 unit of NG. Not only do you waste 90% of your source fuel, it cost more than 10 times what the source fuel NG cost you to make NG gas from. See any problem with that?

Let's cut to the chase. A Hydrogen economy is bankruptcy and DOA.

Now a fun Factoid for you or Q&A.

Q. What is Hydrogen converted to when it burns? In other words what are hydrogen ashes after it burns?

A. WATER

There is a much better and cheaper way to make Methane aka NG. Biogas, or Sewer Gas. In fact several cities make natural gas to generate electricity. They take your garbage, let it rot to make Biogas. When you fart, it is Methane aka NG. Enviro wacko's want cattle destroyed because cattle produces a chit load of Methane which is a green house gas.

I looked up Sabatier process a few days ago and although I would believe it would work I don't feel it would be practical. I have a hydrogen generator on hand at least the plates what is left of it the vessel ruptured last year I got it from a canadian distributor. I have also heard on a man in I think it was brazil who made one and was posting videos up until a year ago that ran itself. I know how crazy that sounds but most really smart people sound crazy. He would always ramble on about how the U.S. government had a oil contract keeping him from pattening his hydrogen generator. Stanley meyers had a pretty interesting setup. But the guy from Brazil set up ran off of sea water looked like a car battery and had the same coil system as meyer did. but all these are just pennies in the well of progress. No one ever talks about how many times Edison failed at the light bulb. Even though Edison was smart you never really hear about Nikola Tesla. My point is some things don't seem practically at this point in our time here but you never know. Think of the possibility of sea water it consist of a lot of different thing hydrogen, oxygen, gold, salt, mercury.

You take a hydrogen generator and make two things oxygen we are cut trees every day, hydrogen has a use but is a pain to transport or contain, but turn it into methane we have a whole new thing to play with. Then you have these byproducts also to play with gold, salt, mercury. the salt can be put back. I don't know what we could do with mercury nasty stuff you ask me but removing it from the sea would be a good thing, then comes gold that you don't have to mine for. then you chlorine, sulfur, magnesium, calcium, and potassium left over most of which you can use for fertilizer all else fails.


Now you probably want to know where am I going to get the energy to run said hydrogen generator wind and solar. Wind has to have a dump which makes heat. Heat = waste so why not throw a hydrogen generator in place of the dump now your efficy just kicked up a notch. but then comes the problem of how to store the hydrogen, we have hydrocarbon and methane. I my eyes methane is more practical due to existing pipelines and a system area setup to handle it. hydrocarbon is mostly a flop it is easier and cheaper to transport water.

[charles2,david000k]

One of the arguments used in favor of hydrogen fuel systems (leaving out for the moment the question of how to get the hydrogen) is that the only combustion product is H2O, water. If you "store" the hydrogen in the form of methane, then the primary combustion products are H2O and CO2. That is still better than the hydrogen to carbon ratio in oil, and, of course, far worse than the zero ratio in burning coal. But it is not the same as burning pure hydrogen.

Are you aware of the difference between a chemical compound and a mixture?

I am going to have to say no. I make lye from ash sometimes in order to make soap. gone as far with that as taking the lye from a liquid to a powder to store over summer when I have no ash. I chemically treat my own water from ditch to drinking with chlorine that's why I have 1500 gallons of holding tanks for my water

[Sunking]

I have also heard on a man in I think it was brazil who made one and was posting videos up until a year ago that ran itself. I know how crazy that sounds but most really smart people sound crazy.

He is either a fool or con artist. The HHO scam has been around for decades. There are many scientific organizations that offer many millions of dollars to the first person who can produce such a working prototype. The rewards have been around for many decades. Not one single person has done it. To do so means the law of Thermal Dynamics and Conservation of Energy would have to be rewritten. Not going to happen as it is impossible.

[charles2,david000k]

He is either a fool or con artist. The HHO scam has been around for decades. There are many scientific organizations that offer many millions of dollars to the first person who can produce such a working prototype. The rewards have been around for many decades. Not one single person has done it. To do so means the law of Thermal Dynamics and Conservation of Energy would have to be rewritten. Not going to happen as it is impossible.

Possibly is I don't doubt it. but taking that wasted energy from a dump load and just turning it into heat could be used a little better if we had a more practical and efficient way of using it on a large scale. just like septic tanks and livestock factories pumping methane into the ozone. why not make a law were they all have to pipe it back into the system or a holding tank for pickup. why not use the tides for energy I know we do in some places. I don't know we are off Thorium and now I am just throwing ideas out there at this point. should've called this thread the think tank. HHO will never achieve the 100% efficacy but does have it uses.

[Sunking]

just like septic tanks and livestock factories pumping methane into the ozone. why not make a law were they all have to pipe it back into the system or a holding tank for pickup.

Who is going to pay for it? You the customer in the form of higher prices is who. Like hydrogen, it is a net energy loss, and tossing money away to do that. There is nothing to be gained except make enviro whacko's happy like the POTUS keeping his promise to punish US citizens.

[jflorey2]

Possibly is I don't doubt it. but taking that wasted energy from a dump load and just turning it into heat could be used a little better if we had a more practical and efficient way of using it on a large scale.

Dump loads are 100% efficient at turning electricity into heat. You can't improve on that

just like septic tanks and livestock factories pumping methane into the ozone. why not make a law were they all have to pipe it back into the system or a holding tank for pickup.

Many people do this - capture methane from sewage and landfills and use it locally. However if you make it a law, you will likely end up wasting far more energy than you save through horrendously impractical and energy-wasting capture systems.

[jflorey2]

So once it is turn to Plutonium can you recycle the Plutonium back to Thorium?

No; you can't "close the cycle" like that. You always need more thorium to drive the cycle.

[charles2,david000k]

Dump loads are 100% efficient at turning electricity into heat. You can't improve on that


Yes they make good heat but what good is that in the summer other than a water heater.


Many people do this - capture methane from sewage and landfills and use it locally. However if you make it a law, you will likely end up wasting far more energy than you save through horrendously impractical and energy-wasting capture systems.

Not with my methane system it uses back pressure to feed the line and you can converter a normal septic system to a digester. No replacing tanks just seal the tank run a line to a filter system to remove sulfur back flash arrestor then to the natural gas pipeline natural gas psi in to the home is 1/4 psi. It would slightly affect the manufacturing and installation process over time but it would not be an overnight thing. It's law to have a catalytic converter and smog system on your car right it won't save you gas or give you more horsepower but you have to have it. there are ways to ease people into these kind of things the (cash for clunkers program) was made to get rid of outdated vehicle.