[blues]

The chemistry of fuels seems to be a rather odd sort of chemistry, and while I am no certainly expert in it, I did a survey of portable fuel in a very broad context. Hydrogen as a fuel has so far not been working out. Hydrogen gas is called the Houdini of gasses because it readily penetrates just about all materials, the few that it penetrates slowly appear to be rather expensive, and normal valves, etc. are impractical. Plus, it is normally extremely low-density energy; you would need a giant balloon of it to get anywhere in a car with it. It is vastly more energy dense as a liquid, but only so long as you kept it rather close to absolute zero temperature.

As far as fuel cells go, there seem to be 10,000 new designs, bus as far as I can see, none of them is claiming to have over come the severe problem of performance degradation due to contamination of their (generally quite expensive) catalytic elements.

On the other hand, the early difficulties of managing H2O2 really do appear to be largely solved. H2O2 can explode in the presence of certain catalysts, but it is otherwise remarkably stable. The other issue with it is that it generates O2 when it (energetically) decomposes, and the presence of O2 can, of course be quite a fire hazard. But then, so is gasoline. And O2 dissipates very rapidly, and harmlessly in air.

There are some catalysts that cause H2O2 to decompose into H2O and O2, and some that retard this decomposition. Oddly enough, H20 itself is a mild catalyst that causes H2O2 to decompose. Household 3% H2O2 with 97% H20, can easily be stabilized with simple additives. “High test” H2O2 is also very stable, as it contains little H2O. But 50% H2O2 and H2O might cause more rapid decomposition, so it might heat up, boil, and even cause a “boiler explosion.” But if the resulting steam and O2 are allowed to escape, this would be generally self limiting, because since water evaporated significantly more quickly than H2O2, the water would become a smaller portion of the ratio. Also, It would seem that H2O2 and H20 could be separated centrifugally, since H2O2 is about 46% heavier than H2O.

A lot has been learned since WW-II. Here is one experimental new rocket motor that looks very promising (except that the government has decided to neglect funding it, for some inscrutable reason):

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=1047

[blues]

A lot of my experience comes from dealing with microwave EMF. We have lots of pretty sophisticated ways of keeping the “antenna patterns” directional. But the constant challenge was always that we would be dealing with “side lobes” of radiation that would always “jump out” in complex ways. I don’t know much about nuclear physics, but it sounds like you are talking about an actual fusion reaction that spits out charged particles in a more-or-less straight line. This is rather hard to understand for someone used to dealing with just EMF.

As for the future of using “brute force” to obtain scarce elements, well maybe. But I wouldn’t bet the ranch on it.

[blues]

Well, my suggestion of using H2O2 for portable power is just the result of a very general survey of the viability of various possible alternatives to carbon based fuels. It would be great if Focus Fusion energy could be used to convert CO2 into, say, methane or propane. It seems important to take account of the fact that batteries and fuel cells thus far developed tend to incorporate exotic elements that may become very scarce in the future.

I think it’s notable that a rocket fueled with, say, high test H2O2 and propane would be operable at “room temperature” (with no concerns about cryogenics), and be (relatively) nearly as efficient as as liquid oxygen-liquid hydrogen vehicle. And so it’s fuel would not leak away in space during lengthy flights.

Also, if it becomes possible to somehow surround a fusion reaction with a sort of “waterfall,” that could conceivably eliminate much of the damage that energetic particles would cause to the interior walls of the reactor. Of course, this is all very speculative.

[blues]

There might be a chance that H2O2 production is a good way of capturing the electrical and X-ray energy.

Sometimes energy needs to be portable, and cannot be attached to power lines. Motorcycles are not attached to them, for example.

All sorts of new batteries and fuel cells (some that use H2O2, even) are being invented, but tend to require expensive chemical elements that will soon become scarce.

[blues]

I have a website that is devoted to a subject unrelated to energy production, and have been seeking a better website platform than I am using (WordPress). I haven’t found one that is really great. Django (not Jango), based on python, looks good, but I don’t have hacker skills sufficient to install and maintain it. There is just not that much out there for people seeking platforms. Also, it is quite easy to make a complete mess by playing around with CSS.

This present site is one of the best-looking I have ever encountered, and if I was using it I wouldn’t change a thing. Unlike most forums, it is easy and pleasant to navigate. So I would just leave it as it is.

[Author]

Posts