View Single Post
Old 07-06-2011, 09:00 PM   #61 (permalink)
oldbeaver
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chile
Posts: 223

Mercedes 89 D - '89 Mercedes 300 E
90 day: 33.86 mpg (US)

Skodie - '09 Skoda Octavia TDI PD
90 day: 38.84 mpg (US)

1993 Mercedes 300D Turbo - '93 Mercedes Benz 300D Turbo W124
90 day: 26.19 mpg (US)

Crossie - '16 Subaru XV Crosstreak
90 day: 9.61 mpg (US)

Crossie - '16 Subaru XV Crosstreak
90 day: 33.34 mpg (US)
Thanks: 15
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Laws of thermodynamics

Quote:
Originally Posted by UFO View Post
oldbeaver, you are not interpreting the laws properly.

"You can't win" means you cannot extract more energy out of the system than you put in. Truly, you "cannot win".

"You can't break even" means all energy conversion systems have an intrinsic loss (called entropy), so truly, you "cannot break even".

Forget about "HOH". The conversion efficiencies are easy to calculate, and they add up so badly there is no chance of a mileage improvement. NONE.
You wrote: "You cannot get more energy out from the system than you put in".

Yes, you are completely right.

Now, in a Otto engine you put, say, 100 of gas energy and get 20% out of it as movement, the rest is lost. In the process, some energy is spent in preparing gas to burn (compression), inject gas, etc.. This energy is less than the one we get out of gasoline. Therefore, there is 20% of utility energy. We get some energy out of it all for us to use.

In the case of HOH, we get some energy out of water too. Water is a fuel, just like gasoline. Unfortunately, preparing water (electrolysis) takes a lot of energy, actually more than we get out of it by combustion of H in the engine.

At least, for me is so. In one case algebraic sum is negative, in the other is positive. Is a practical thing. Laws are there and practical things are here. And they BOTH work.

This is the way I see it.

__________________
Mercedes 300 D turbo 1993
  Reply With Quote