Water, Water Everywhere...

[anjou]

Is there a chemist or Physisist in the house?

Im not the classically trained type, more hands on and so theory isnt quite my forte.
For the past few months ive continued pondering on water makers. They are a mixed blessing, expensive to make, run and maintain. Is there a better way of providing water?

H2O is all around us. In its constituent elements its the combination of 2 Hydrogen molecules and 1 Oxygen.
Hydrogen and Oxygen are gases, but combined they form a liquid.
Gas is lighter than water
Gases can be compressed, liquids cannot, therefore liquids are bulky and heavy.


Aircraft con trails are condensed vapour.
The separate oxygen and 2 hydrogen elements in the atmosphere have been pressed together to make water.


All thats needed is either a pressure pump to force 2 x H and 1 x O molecules together at the right temperature or a canister of each gas and a mixing chamber.

Ok, im not expecting a Nobel prize or even a Horarary Science Doctorate for this observation, and I sure cant patent it as its a natural process, but why hasnt anyone thought of dehydrated water before?

Its so simple, whats not to like and why cant it work?

[Fishman_Tx]

Ok just funnin' here. Check this out..
buydehydratedwater

[Tellie]

More fun

Dehydrated water is an oxymoron or contradiction in terms. The combination of the adjective dehydrated with the noun water creates a paradox. Much like a cordless extension cord, dehydrated water is essentially nothing

Literally Thousands of Uses!
Dry Martinis-Manhattans
Watering Cactus
VW Bug Anti-Freeze
Dry Cleaning
Humidifying Saunas
Filling Dry Docks
Dry Mopping Floors
In Dry Sinks
Dry Shampoos
In Dry-Cell Batteries
Dampening Dry Humor
Making Dry Ice

Dehydrated Water - Video

[anjou]

How many molecules are in Oxymoron?

[jkleins]

Isn't his just how a fuel cell works. It requires a catalyst to combine the two elements but the end product is water. So one of these days you can just get a tank of hydrogen gas and a fuel cell and you not only get water but power as well.

Jim

[bstreep]

Originally Posted by anjou

All thats needed is either a pressure pump to force 2 x H and 1 x O molecules together at the right temperature or a canister of each gas and a mixing chamber.

If you compress a gas, such as oxygen or hydrogen enough, they turn to liquid. Water, hydrogen and oxygen, each, are most condensed in liquid form.

Separating hydrogen from oxygen (water) requires quite a bit of energy. Conversely, putting them back together releases a LOT of energy - and requires simply an ignition source (a match works well). Remember the Hindenburg.

In conclusion, the most efficient manner to carry water or its components, is as a liquid, in a tank. Your water tank.

[anotherT34C]

Let me ask, what are you hoping to gain?

Once you compress a gas enough, it becomes a liquid. The mass of water is (about) equal to the masses of it's constituent elements.

I don't think that route will prove useful, but putting thought into new ways to make water is certainly worthy of the effort.

[Tellie]

Originally Posted by anjou

How many molecules are in Oxymoron?

Hey, I think there's a shot in there!

[GringoOnStingo]

Originally Posted by anjou

... a canister of each gas and a mixing chamber.

One canister of oxygen = high explosive (let's call that element HE for the sake of this chemistry discussion)
One canister of hydrogen = high explosive
2HE = USA government sending you to that nasty bay in Cuba making bombs .

[anjou]

Originally Posted by bstreep

Separating hydrogen from oxygen (water) requires quite a bit of energy. Conversely, putting them back together releases a LOT of energy - and requires simply an ignition source (a match works well). Remember the Hindenburg.

It just gets better. Making water also makes energy.

If the burning hydrogen in the Hindenburg produced water, why didnt it put the fire out?

The fuel cell idea is great. So much better than a watermaker

[James S]

Keep after it Anjou....you may come up with something...
How efficient (NOT) are those solar distillers...why don't we see them on boats more often?
Some of the ones in life rafts are inflatable and float out side the raft...why don't we see them floating around at anchorages?

[bstreep]

Originally Posted by anjou

It just gets better. Making water also makes energy.

If the burning hydrogen in the Hindenburg produced water, why didnt it put the fire out?

The fuel cell idea is great. So much better than a watermaker

First, water does not put out all fires, as you probably remember from seeing oil/grease fires. Hydrogen burning is a chemical fire. In the case of the Hindenburg, fortunately, there was an overwhelming amount of hydrogen versus oxygen in the surrounding air. That kept the fire from becoming truly explosive. You mix 2 parts hydrogen gas and 1 part oxygen gas in a balloon, and put a match to it, you better be standing WAY back.

Second, the coefficient of expansion of water versus vapor is about 1600. In other words, it takes about 1600 gallons of gas, to produce 1 gallon of water. 1600 gallons of a mix of hydrogen and oxygen is more than a bomb. All to make a gallon of water?

As well, Oxygen, which is relatively cheap, is about $0.20 a pound. Hydrogen and oxygen have traditionally been made by separating water - a process that requires a lot of "work" or energy.

In conclusion, this whole discussion makes absolutely no sense. It's bassackwards.

[Hampus]

Fuelcell = burn alcohol to make water I rest my case.

/Hampus

[anjou]

Your right so far Bill.
But the sky is full of air and its all around us, so its a ready source of water. It doesnt need storing and needs no transportation.
Best of all, its free. No sales tax to pay.

Maybe this doesnt make sense. Maybe its breaking the known rules of science. Rules are there to be broken and they arnt written in stone.

Originally Posted by bstreep

Second, the coefficient of expansion of water versus vapor is about 1600. In other words, it takes about 1600 gallons of gas, to produce 1 gallon of water. 1600 gallons of a mix of hydrogen and oxygen is more than a bomb. All to make a gallon of water?

As well, Oxygen, which is relatively cheap, is about $0.20 a pound. Hydrogen and oxygen have traditionally been made by separating water - a process that requires a lot of "work" or energy.

In conclusion, this whole discussion makes absolutely no sense. It's bassackwards.

[ViribusUnitis]

Quick back ground. I am a chemical engineer. My job is to do similar process analysis to this. (In other words, I'm a "classicly trained type" to do exactly this.)

The act of removing hydrogen from water requires huge amounts of energy. We're talking kW of energy for fractions of a gallon per minute.

If you attempted to use a fuel cell to recover that energy in combining the hydrogen and oxygen to produce water, at best you would only recover about half the energy you put in to generate the hydrogen. With a fuel cell that you could afford to buy, and operate on a boat, you’re probably looking at recovering roughly a third of the energy used to generate the hydrogen.

Plus, the cost would be high to build the device, even with the low efficency fuel cell.

Not a bad idea, but it just wouldn't be better than a more traditional RO watermaker.