 |
There are currently, 203 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
| |
| |
Independent Testing Results for Xogen
Posted on Thursday, January 01, 2004 @ 13:15:06 GMT by vlad
|
|
Anonymous writes: www.xogen.ca/tests.php Technical Advisory panel statement as received by Xogen power Inc.
April 8th 2003
Following on its mandate, the Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) has assessed data testing and analysis conducted relative to the basic science of the Xogen technology (hereafter 'the technology') and makes the following statements:
The technology is not conventional electrolysis as governed by the laws of electrolysis established by Michael Faraday in 1834, because:
The technology produces approximately 3 times more gas output for approximately 1/3rd the current required by conventional electrolysis;
The gas output in part (a) is achieved without special water (i.e. deionized, demineralized ) or catalyst (electrolyte). Only City of Calgary tap water was used;
As a minimum, with the same power input, the gas production that has been achieved with environmental streams tested is similar to what has been achieved with ordinary tap water;
The output gas is a stoichiometric mixture of hydrogen and oxygen containing less than 3% water vapour;
The electronic circuitry is digitally driven;
The gas output does not require drying or filtering prior to its use for combustion;
The technology is manufactured from off-the-shelf components.
In order to address issues of safety, the Xogen generator output was combusted as it was produced, without the requirement for gas storage.
The output gas has been used to operate a Briggs and Stratton engine and a 1kW Honda generator under 90% load conditions, with very minor modifications to both engines.
The TAP also provided an additional clarifying statement that read, "Faraday's Electrolysis Laws must not be confused with the Laws of Thermodynamics. Faradays Electrolysis Laws describe the maximum usable output obtainable using conventional electrolysis for a given quantity of input energy. The Laws of Thermodynamics clearly state that the energy available in a given system will never exceed the overall energy contained within the given system. The Xogen Technology does not under any circumstances violate this fundamental Law of Physics."
Technical Advisory Panel(TAP)
Keith Clayton holds a B.Sc. Chemical Engineering and is a Professional Engineer in the Province of Alberta. He joins the panel after retiring from Agrium Inc. with more than 35 years of service. His most recent position with Agrium was as Director of Technology. Mr. Clayton brings a great depth of knowledge on hydrogen generation technologies and techniques, hydrogen being a key input into the fertilizer manufacturing process.
Norm Bartley holds a Masters Degree in Electrical Engineering, and is a Professional Engineer and Faculty Member at the University of Calgary. He specializes in electronic circuits and systems, and has provided expert opinions on the Xogen Technology in the past.
Amar Amarnath holds a Masters Degree in Chemical Engineering, as well as a B.Tech (Honors) in Chemical Engineering, and is a Professional Engineer in the Province of Ontario. Mr. Amarnath is an independent consultant, and has served as such for numerous companies, including Syncrude, Sherrit Inc. and Agrium. He has over 25 years of experience in broad based hydrogen generation techniques and chemistry related fields.
Technical Advisory Panel(TAP)
The Xogen technology performance as independently tested by the Alberta Research Council March 2001.
18 Amp hours of current flowing will liberate approximately 100.2 litres of hydrogen/oxygen gas of which 2/3rds (66.8 litres) is hydrogen and 1/3rd (33.4 litres) is oxygen.
Concerning the physics of the Xogen technology, all other disclosure about the technology that we can make at this time is contained in US patents 6,126,794 and 6,419,815.
How do we compare
Conventional Electrolysis of water
53.6 Amp hours of current flowing will liberate 22.414 litres of hydrogen gas at 0 degrees C, 1 atm.
Xogen Technology
18 Amp hours of current flowing will liberate approximately 100.2 litres of hydrogen/oxygen gas of which 2/3rds (66.8 litres) is hydrogen and 1/3rd (33.4 litres) is oxygen.
Tested by the Alberta Research Council March 2001.
The TAP has concluded that the technology is not conventional electrolysis as governed by the laws of electrolysis established by Michael Faraday in 1834, because the Xogen technology does not operate within the voltage parameters as defined by Faraday's Law. The Xogen technology produced approximately three (3) times more oxy-hydrogen gas output using approximately one third (1/3) the current used by conventional electrolysis. As a minimum, with the same power input, the gas production that has been achieved with environmental streams tested is similar to what has been achieved with ordinary tap water.
Conventional electrolysis of Water
Electrolysis of water is by definition the use of electrons via an applied current and voltage to split water into hydrogen and oxygen gas. The chemistry of the process is determined by the following equations:
Positive electrode (anode):
Negative electrode (cathode):
Net reaction:
* - Potentials based on measurements made in 1 M sulfuric acid at 25 °C and 1 atm. Taken from p.D-121, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 55th Ed, CRC Press, 1974. This potential is the same whether the solution is acidic, basic, or neutral. However, it has been argued that added heat energy is needed to compensate for the change in entropy of the system. This added heat raises the minimum necessary potential of the system to 1.47 V ( J. MíO. Bockris, 1980).
The theoretical power efficiency for the electrolysis of water can be calculated in a number of ways. As long as the same conditions are applied to each case, the results give a relative comparison between the actual efficiencies of different electrolysis gas generators. The water electrolysis industry typically reports power efficiencies in kilowatt hours of power required to produce 1 m³ of pure hydrogen gas at 25 °C and 1 atmosphere pressure (101.325 kPa). Ideally, one mole of water plus two moles of electrons will produce one mole of hydrogen gas.
1 mole of H2 gas is equivalent to 22.414 L, or 0.022414 m³ of H2 gas.
2 moles of electrons are equivalent to 53.6 Ah [(2 mole)(96,485 C/mole)(1 A/Cs)(1 h/3600 s)].
Ideally, 1.47 V is needed, so the ideal power efficiency is:
= (53.6 Ah)(1.47 V)/(0.022414 m³) = 3.52 kWh/m³ of H2 gas at 25 °C, 1 atm (1.013 bar).
Simply put :
53.6 Amp hours of current flowing will liberate 22.414 litres of hydrogen gas at 0 degrees C, 1 atm.
Conventional electrolysis as governed by the laws of electrolysis established by Michael Faraday in 1834 will have the above performance.
Source Taken from CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 55th Ed, CRC Press, 1974.
More independent laboratory test data will be posted shortly.
|
| |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
| |
Average Score: 5
Votes: 1
| |
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
Re: Independent Testing Results for Xogen (Score: 1)
by Technophile on Friday, January 02, 2004 @ 08:32:49 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) | This looks promising. Nine times as much hydrogen out for the same energy. That should be enough to close the loop.
Their credibility in my mind is enhanced by similar results from pulsed electrolysis experiments by Kanarev in Russia. http://guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/story/Kanarev/electrolysis/index.html
So when are we going to see products from them? |
|
|
Where does the energy come from? (Score: 0)
by Anonymous on Friday, January 02, 2004 @ 16:55:57 GMT | Their credibility is nil until they answer the simple question: Where does the energy come from? They have stated that their technology is consistent with the laws of thermodynaimics, so I assume they have an answer to this.
I am amazed that people are willing to believe Xogen's extraordinary claims without satisfactory proof or explanation. We need a big dollop of plain old common sense here. |
|
|
Time for a last look at Xogen (Score: 0)
by Anonymous on Sunday, July 18, 2004 @ 12:24:45 GMT | Since Xogen's gone bankrupt, the trail is going to go cold on figuring out what happened there. I've been digging into the old reports and I'll try to contact the people involved before it's all forgotten.
About the Alberta Research Council report showing that the Xogen process isn't electrolysis, people had questions, what was the Voltage and the efficiency of the Xogen process. Using their data, Efficiency of Xogen Process shows that the potential drop was about 24 V, and that the efficiency was about 50%.
The ARC conclusion that the Xogen process isn't conventional electrolysis was incorrect. There were 3 errors, a failure to apply the ideal gas law, a measurement error, and a circuit analysis error in the ARC report. I go through the numbers in Errors in ARC's report to Xogen and Earlier Xogen Publication of ARC Report. There could have been other errors as well. The ARC report was textbook sloppy lab work. What they should have done is run the Xogen cells using the Xogen process with a varying waveform and then as conventional electrolysis - the same electrodes and the same water but straight DC. Instead they just guessed what electrolysis would do, and were off by a little more than a factor or 8. There must be something in the water up there. |
|
|
|
|
