Posted by Richard W. on June 7, 2009, 11:13 pm
Bill Lear also tried and failed to develop a practical one.
I think that's the one.
Posted by Eeyore on June 7, 2009, 3:29 pm
Day Brown wrote:
Steam engines are hopelessly inefficient. Gasoline's far better, never mind
diesel which is better still.
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment
to my email address
Posted by Neo on June 20, 2009, 6:19 pm
What if you burned hydrogen peroxide instead? ..
I know this feels like beating a dead horse but
there is this web site on a steam turbine engine
driven by burning a 40% hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)
sugar /water fuel designed by a Nick Delchev. It
claims that while the Hydrogen peroxide H202 based
fuel has only 1/3 the energy as ethanol per
gallon cost only 65 cents per gallon to make. They
also claimed that this Devchev steam turbine would
need only two gallons of hydrogen peroxide fuel to run
the same load as a conventional piston engine using
one gallon of ethanol. see
In adition researchers at Vanderbilt University
in Nashville, Tennessee used a concentrated
form of hydrogen peroxide to generate steam
to power a robotic arm. see..
Bionic Arm Powered by Rockets
Charles Q Choi Live science
29 August 2007
unlike wood - hydroperoxide fuel used in
both cases above was extremely dangerous/caustic
however, the steam generate by burning
such a fuel would equally as dangerous.
Posted by Curbie on June 20, 2009, 8:12 pm
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:19:48 -0700 (PDT), Neo
Real interesting article, Thanks!
There just may be a future in the "hydrogen future" after all?
Posted by Day Brown on June 21, 2009, 2:31 am
Would you need a haz mat suit to fill your tank?