At 12:49 AM 3/28/5, Grimer wrote: >Whilst researching the work of the Graneau's I >came across the following. > > >================================================ >http://users.erols.com/iri/FutureEnergyTech.html > > Cold Fog Discovery > >Many other systems exist today, in a research, >development, or theoretical stage, which also >convert potential energy into useful work. The >first example is the "Cold Fog" invention of >Dr. Peter Graneau from Northeastern University >that converts chemical bond energy into kinetic >energy. Intermolecular bond energy in water is >an available amount of energy estimated at 2.3 >kJ/g.
"Bond energy" in a traditional sense is an energy well, a *lack* of potential energy, not a source of potential energy, unless the bond constituants are free of the bond or able to bond to other substances and thereby create a deeper energy well. However, Graneau and Graneau do indeed suggest there exists some mechanism whereby energy can be stored in molecular bonds, and that the source of the energy so stored is solar. >When injected with a high voltage capacitor >discharge of 39.8 Joules, normal rainwater is >accelerated into a cold fog that loses about >31.2 Joules of low-grade heat and a comparable >amount (29.2 Joules) in fog kinetic energy output. >As reported in the Journal of Plasma Physics,[3] >the output energy thus exceeds the input energy >by about 100% creating a 2-to-1 overunity >condition favorable for reduction to a motorized >conversion system. > > Capacitor Input > Energy: 39.8 joules > ! > V >Fog Kinetic En. <- Cold Fog -> Low Grade Heat > 29.2 Joules Accelerator 31.2 Joules >================================================ > >Now this is not a million miles from the type of thing >that Jones and I have been suggesting. Furthermore, it >is clearly over unity and unequivocally recognised to >be so. [snip] "Unequivocally recognised" seems a bit strong. Graneau and Graneau certainly have been subject to plenty of criticism in the usenet sci groups regarding their research. It is not exactly considered mainstream. I am not saying here that their experimental results are not right though. It should be noted however, that, AFAIK, even the Graneau's do not suggest the source of energy is "free". Their experiments showed that the same experiments repeated with the same water do not produce the same excess energy. It has to be re-energized by exposure to the sun. Unless there has been some development of which I am unaware, there is no repeatable closed box mechanism suggested to repeatably create "over unity" energy. Regards, Horace Heffner
