Claims about hydrogen

[WolfattheDoor]

I had this slightly patronising email today (or maybe I'm just a bit grumpy). Anybody got any comments on their website and claims?

Dear Sir,

Your summary about hydrogen is misleading and incorrect. Our Company, Genesys, LLC has developed a revolutionary technology that generates hydrogen from geothermal energy using only seawater as the initial feedstock. It is far more cheaper to transport hydrogen via pipeline than electricity. Please review our web site: www.genesys-hydrogen.com for an education in hydrogen. We presently have a working minipilot plant that is 90% efficient and can be retrofitted to the exhaust of any steam turbine. Oil also needs energy in order to be useable (e.g. gasoline). It really depends on the source of the primary energy and its cost.

Regards,

Ronny Bar-Gadda
CEO
Genesys, LLC

[biffvernon]

It's a rather sad sort of scam, someone trying to con money out of folk for "investment opportunities". Just don't touch it.

[clv101]

It is really just about geothermal energy (with hydrogen tacked on the back end). So sure - geothermal is good idea. The hydrogen aspect is interesting but probably pointless, might as well just use the geothermal energy source to generate electricity.

[Andy Hunt]

It is far more cheaper

Cheaperer, surely?

[LobsterNinja]

I had this slightly patronising email today (or maybe I'm just a bit grumpy). Anybody got any comments on their website and claims?

Dear Sir,

Your summary about hydrogen is misleading and incorrect. Our Company, Genesys, LLC has developed a revolutionary technology that generates hydrogen from geothermal energy using only seawater as the initial feedstock. It is far more cheaper to transport hydrogen via pipeline than electricity. Please review our web site: www.genesys-hydrogen.com for an education in hydrogen. We presently have a working minipilot plant that is 90% efficient and can be retrofitted to the exhaust of any steam turbine. Oil also needs energy in order to be useable (e.g. gasoline). It really depends on the source of the primary energy and its cost.

Regards,

Ronny Bar-Gadda
CEO
Genesys, LLC

Yeah, I got the same response. Paraphrasing:

Me: You seem to be claiming efficiency in excess of 2000%, which seems to violate the first law of thermodynamics. Just to be clear, are you actually making such a claim. I so, how? If not, can you explain why your numbers are not in violation of the first law. [and then I go into some detail...]

Ronny: [paraphrasing...] You are misrepresenting my claims, and you tone is hostile.

He is now claiming to that eRET can power a 107 Kw electric vehicle, with solar as the only external power source.

"Providing 100% Renewable Self-Charging Electrical Power for the Electric Vehicle Using a New Technology Called eRET" - http://www.genesys-hydrogen.com/images/ ... hicles.pdf

I sent him the following, and waiting for a response:

Please do not consider the following to be an attack on any of your ideas. I'm sure you know much more about this stuff than anyone else I know. I offer this in the spirit of humble curiosity, with the hope that you can educate me. Thank you in advance for your time.

I find your EV brochure disturbing.

Without quite saying so explicitly, you seem to be claiming solar energy to electricity conversion efficiency in excess of 2000%. That's impressive for two reasons: Firstly, the world record to date is 44.4%. Secondly, efficiencies in excess of 100% for any energy conversion are generally considered to be in violation of the first law of thermodynamics. I apologize for stating the obvious, but in my ignorance I find this puzzling, so being explicit seems appropriate.

Previous conversations with Ronny about high power outputs could be rationally explained in terms of measurements of the maximum amplitude of pulsed power. This seems logical, as much higher measurements were achieved using a digital oscilloscope. If a practical measurement of usable power output were needed, a simple power meter would do the trick. Such an interpretation allowed me to consider what appeared on the surface to be outrageous claims to be merely misleading, but not necessarily falsehoods.

But the EV brochure describes an actual application, so pulse amplitude is irrelevant. The relevant measurement is time-averaged power output.

Please tell me whether or not you are actually claiming efficiencies in excess of 100%, otherwise I have no way to know how to interpret any of this.

Here is why I think you are claiming such impressive efficiency:

Claim: "eRET SCS can be tailored to deliver the full power of the electric motor (107 Kw)" - http://www.genesys-hydrogen.com/images/ ... hicles.pdf

Solar energy density on a good day is 1.4 kW/m^2. My Prius has at most 3.6m^2 of usable area. That would yield about 5 kW of raw solar power. You claim 107 kW, which is 2140% efficient.

Not to mention that you claim that the car will run on batteries at night. To make this reliable, you would need, say, twice as much power, so 4000%. But I digress. 4000% is qualitatively no different than 2000%.

No doubt you can achieve pulsed power spikes of 107 kW, but that won't help because the engine consumes power continuously, including in between spikes. Therefore you are implicitly claiming time-averaged power output of 107 kW.

So, with 2000% efficiency, why use solar at all? Seems to me that you could have the eRet module feed back into itself. Why do you need an external source of energy?

Feel free to poke holes in my various comments. But in the end, I just have one question: How do you explain 107 Kw output from 5 kW of raw solar power?

[adam2]

Hang on to your money

[ericgarmin]

Of course, companies will defend their vision and products to the hilt. I wouldn't pay too much attention to what they have to say.