Electricity Or Hydrogen?

[IT Minion]

Surely its only PM if you can power an engine entirely on the fuel it creates.

If getting (sometimes) a larger increase in output than it costs to get it is PM then cars with mechanical superchargers are examples of it...

In energy terms a supercharged engine is less efficient than a non supercharged engine. You get fewer watts of power for the same amount of fuel.

Let's not waste everyone's time digging into it here, but let's just say I'm sceptical that the stuff sxturbos working on will improve feet per gallon for the ship's it's destined for.

 

[fillyboy]

Ships produce an obscene amount of particulate and they have very little if any at all regulation. A lot of these engines are 20 years old and use old inefficient technology for the diesel system, so this was designed as a way to reduce the emissions of these.

Now that the shipping industry is starting to see very minor regulation on emissions the industry is exploring ways to reduce emissions without having to go through the expense of upgrading the engines or scrapping the vessel altogether.

Aren't there half a dozen 'super' container ships using bunker fuel that combined, throw out more emissions than all the cars in the world, including transams?

 

[ChrisR]

Aren't there half a dozen 'super' container ships using bunker fuel that combined, throw out more emissions than all the cars in the world, including transams?

I've heard similar.

 

[sxturbo]

Aren't there half a dozen 'super' container ships using bunker fuel that combined, throw out more emissions than all the cars in the world, including transams?

Lol,

Yes,

But don't worry it's us pesky motorists that are the problem...

 

[fillyboy]

I believe the 'bunker fuel' has been outlawed but not sure of the dates, or wether the Chinese will ignore legislation, bunker fuel is basically the crudes of fuels, barely refined and the most heavily polluting fuel on the planet.

Here:

World's 15 Biggest Ships Create More Pollution Than All The Cars In The World - Industry Tap

World’s 15 Biggest Ships Create More Pollution Than All The Cars In The World

By: Jeremy Helms | June 5th, 2013

Says James Corbett, professor of marine policy at the University of Delaware: “Ship pollution affects the health of communities in coastal and inland regions around the world, yet pollution from ships remains one of the least regulated parts of our global transportation system.” It sounds serious, but how bad could it be? Staggeringly, if a report by the UK’s Guardian newspaper is to be believed. According to their story, just one of the world’s largest container ships can emit about as much pollution as 50 million cars. Further, the 15 largest ships in the world emit as much nitrogen oxide and sulphur oxide as the world’s 760 million cars.

The problem isn’t necessarily with the ships’ 109,000-horsepower engines that endlessly spin away 24 hours a day, 280 days a year. In fact, these powerplants are some of the most fuel efficient units in the world. The real issue lies with the heavy fuel oil the ships run on and the almost complete lack of regulations applied to the giant exhaust stacks of these container ships.

The good news is that pressure is building from various governments around the world, including the United States, which just recently introduced legislation to keep these ships at least 230 miles away from U.S. coastlines. Similar measures are likely to follow in other countries like the United Kingdom. [via]

 

[Captain Nemesis]

In energy terms a supercharged engine is less efficient than a non supercharged engine. You get fewer watts of power for the same amount of fuel.

The point is that you take some of the output from the engine and use it to drive a supercharger which makes the engine produce more power by an amount greater than what the supercharger consumed.

But it aint perpetual motion.

 

[fillyboy]

But it aint perpetual motion.

I don't think he suggested it was, but crack on, he might be a racist.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

I don't think he suggested it was, but crack on, he might be a racist.

I can believe all of that, but where does the hydrogen come from? Feeding two different fields into an engine to get more power is believable, perpetual motion machines aren't.

As I thought.

You could have saved yourself some typing - you only needed the first 3 words of this:

I don't think he suggested it was, but crack on, he might be a racist.

 

[IT Minion]

The point is that you take some of the output from the engine and use it to drive a supercharger which makes the engine produce more power by an amount greater than what the supercharger consumed.

But it aint perpetual motion.

Ok, you don't get it. I'm not going to teach you physics.

Superchargers produce less useful power. Energy is wasted making the supercharger force more air in, which means it isn't spent turning the wheels of a car. Which is why superchargers reduce mpg. This hydrogen rubbish will do the same.

The reason people like superchargers is that you get to use lighter, smaller engines which can save fuel or money overall. But again, no one has ever made that work for hydrogen enrichment.

 

[sxturbo]

Ok, you don't get it. I'm not going to teach you physics.

Superchargers produce less useful power. Energy is wasted making the supercharger force more air in, which means it isn't spent turning the wheels of a car. Which is why superchargers reduce mpg. This hydrogen rubbish will do the same.

The reason people like superchargers is that you get to use lighter, smaller engines which can save fuel or money overall. But again, no one has ever made that work for hydrogen enrichment.

As I said it's not really used to create power or fuel efficiency it's more to reduce the emissions of the engines which is significant

 

[IT Minion]

As I said it's not really used to create power or fuel efficiency it's more to reduce the emissions of the engines which is significant

If it claims to boost efficiency, then everything it claims should be suspect.

 

[Captain Nemesis]

Ok, you don't get it.

OK, you dont get it.

I'm not going to teach you physics.

Certainly not, if you dont get it.

Superchargers produce less useful power. Energy is wasted making the supercharger force more air in, which means it isn't spent turning the wheels of a car. Which is why superchargers reduce mpg.

And this is an example of you not getting it.

What youre not getting is the point I'm making.

Energy is used making the supercharger force more air in, which means more fuel can be burned. And for sure, you therefore end up with higher fuel consumption.

But you also end up with more power.

If a supercharger takes 20% of the power of the engine to run but adds 40% because of the forced induction then that is a net gain. And it isnt perpetual motion.

Thats why they use them for performance reasons on sports cars and racing cars. Not to improve consumption but to increase power. And it isnt perpetual motion.

Superchargers do not violate the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Neither does a device which uses x% of an engines power to effect a change in operation which results in >x% power increase.


The reason I keep pointing out that a supercharger is not perpetual motion is because you kept on saying things like this:

What does that do to the engine output power? What about the power to split the water??

Each unit requires 3kw of power and comes off the ships load.

The engines power is increased a maximum of 10% but I'm told it's minimal in most cases

generating it locally and getting more useful power out would violate the second law of thermodynamics.

Feeding two different fields into an engine to get more power is believable, perpetual motion machines aren't.

As I thought.
[YouTube video related to a perpetual motion machine]

But maybe the genius who designed it can start working on transmuting lead into gold afterwards.

Talking about "useful power" does not get you off the hook that you were objecting to the idea that you could get more than an x% increase in power from an engine if you used x% to modify its operation because it would be 2nd law violating perpetual motion.

 

[transam]

Ultima sports cars are apparently going to offer a road car with a super charged LS chevy engine producing 1200 BHP

that may be interesting

 

[Captain Nemesis]

There are other ways to get more oxygen into an engine....

 

[empip]

'... some exciting hydrogen experiments. We describe the process that creates powerful shock waves then demonstrate ever more powerful detonations of hydrogen/oxygen mixtures.'

'Experimental Investigation of Liquid Hydrogen Hazards, 1960, Film Number 1'

'Experimental Investigation of Liquid Hydrogen Hazards, 1960, Film Number 2'

-0-