Ashesh
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2012
- Messages
- 937
- Reaction score
- -6
While Pakistan is in the grip of its worst energy crisis since its inception in 1947, coincidentally, or perhaps by design, the country is also in the grip of a media controversy pertaining to cheap fuel. An invention put forward by Engineer Aagha Waqar has not only had a magnetic effect on the Pakistani people and its apex bodies of engineering and scientific research, but also seems to have mesmerised both. Rationality demands that we judge everything on merit and not upon how beneficial or how necessary an idea is. Though there always are litmus tests for verifying the veracity of any claim, but more importantly, the proper stage needs to be employed for putting these tests to a claim.
Where the stage for analysing a social or policy claim could be a debate on a live political show, it surely isnt the appropriate forum for evaluating scientific claims, especially not those challenging the fundamentals of physics. Local media widely reported that PEC arranged a demonstration of Engineer Waqars car which he claims runs on water only which was attended among others by some ministers and delegates of Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC), Pakistan Science Foundation (PSF), National University of Science and Technology (NUST) and Pakistan Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (PCSIR),who inspected the car. Now rational thinking would demand that PEC would have set the stage for verifying Engineer Waqars claims. For this, let us first look at what exactly the claim is and then discuss possible ways to verify it.
As the dust of the news and live TV shows settles, one realises that producing hydrogen from water is not a new concept rather the World knows it by the name of electrolysis since 1800. Similarly running a car on hydrogen as its primary fuel is also not an innovation; rather two different types of technologies are already utilising hydrogen, both being available commercially. The first technology, a fuel cell, uses hydrogen and oxygen as its inputs and converts the energy released by its oxidation to electricity which is used to power a car through a motor. Hondas FCX Clarity is one among many cars using this technology.
The second technology simply relies on hydrogen as a fuel for combustion in an internal combustion engine. BMWs Hydrogen 7 uses hydrogen as one of its two distinct fuel sources. So the question remains, what could possibly be new about this sensational news? One has to rely for the information given by the inventor who claims that no energy is being created but a closed loop is converting water to hydrogen and oxygen (HHO) by electrolysis and the required electric current for this process is taken from the car battery.
Now the keen observer will notice the feedback loop in this arrangement. The car battery has a finite amount of charge stored in its cells and needs recharging for continued operation. If the electricity required for electrolysis was to be taken from this battery, it must be noted that in order to charge it you need the car to be running as the battery takes its charge from the cars generator. Now, not only is it known that electrolysis requires a lot of energy (in the form of electric current), but it is also known to be a notoriously inefficient process with the release of heat.
For a moment, not accounting for the inefficiencies and also for the conversion and other losses, say X amount of joules (the unit of energy) are required to separate Y number of hydrogen molecules from oxygen. These Y number of molecules of hydrogen as a source of energy can never generate energy more than X joules keeping the law of conservation of energy in mind. Practically it will be far less than X joules due to dissipation and conversion losses.
Now imagine if you were to again subtract X joules of energy from the generated energy in order to feed the electrolysis process, you would have a net deficit of energy. This could be made up for some time by the charge stored in the battery prior to electrolysis, which could be either by charging it from an external electric source or through the car while driving it on gasoline or another source. But this charge will soon deplete and the car would come to a halt. Now if someone wants to claim that it is possible to drive a car powered solely on water as a fuel he has to prove one thing, that the electrolysis process is not draining the battery, which in that case would be the actual source of energy and not water as claimed. (Not to mention that we are assuming that the car is not fitted with a hidden supply of fuel!)
This shouldnt have been a difficult task for either the claimant (Engineer Waqar) or the verifiers (PEC and PCSIR scientists and engineers) to prove, for instance by simply taking a reading of the batterys charge before and after the demonstrated drive. While one could think of many reasons why Engineer Waqar would not have liked to put his invention to such a litmus test, what could be the reason that the highest bodies of engineering and science in this country did not think rationally before beating the drum for him? Where they must be enthralled by the thought of defying basic laws of physics, cant they imagine the disgrace involved in promoting a centuries old idea as a novel invention?
History has it that the issue was picked up by our sensational media in no time and top anchors of the country were debating it at prime-time with our nations scientific and engineering heavyweights. There were some voices of reason but they were soon silenced by the more emotional and wishful thinkers. Now that Prof Dr Atta-ur-Rehman has flamboyantly challenged the idea on national television whereas Dr A Q Khan, Dr Manzoor Soomro and Dr Shoukat Parvez have put their weight behind it, it is to be seen whether a Nobel laureate in form of Engineer Waqar is in the making or another scandal of Watergate proportions which will discredit our scientific and engineering bodies.
The dilemma appears far bigger than this when one realises that neither our people as a nation, nor our leaders think rationally when it comes to vital choices ranging from choosing the rulers to the choice of the correct system and policies. As Dr Atta-ur-Rehman has spent the last decade in promoting higher education in Pakistan the prime objective of which is to instil rational thinking this perhaps explains his abrupt and emotional response.
In all likelihood the world will once again have to accept the bitter truth that water is not a fuel, it never has been one, and it never will be. Water does not burn as it is already burnt making it spent fuel. It is exhaust, the by-product of combustion. Yes, one of its constituents, hydrogen, is surely a fuel but that doesnt mean a lot. An apple suspended in air also has energy which it loses by falling to the ground and in order to re-energise it you need to put at least as much (in reality more) energy into the apple to bring it back to the same height. Same holds true for the hydrogen in water, it has lost its potential to serve as an energy source and needs re-energising.
After all, some might want to seek consolation in the fact that Pakistan will not be the first country to have flirted with the idea of using water as a fuel but right now is the last one in a long list. As for Engineer Waqar, if he got it right, he will at least come be known as the 21st century Einstein, but what if all this was just foul play? Will he be crowned as the next prime minister or president?
The writer is a doctoral fellow at United Nations University MERIT in the Netherlands and is working as an assistant professor at Muhammad Ali Jinnah University, Islamabad.
Our very own
Where the stage for analysing a social or policy claim could be a debate on a live political show, it surely isnt the appropriate forum for evaluating scientific claims, especially not those challenging the fundamentals of physics. Local media widely reported that PEC arranged a demonstration of Engineer Waqars car which he claims runs on water only which was attended among others by some ministers and delegates of Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC), Pakistan Science Foundation (PSF), National University of Science and Technology (NUST) and Pakistan Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (PCSIR),who inspected the car. Now rational thinking would demand that PEC would have set the stage for verifying Engineer Waqars claims. For this, let us first look at what exactly the claim is and then discuss possible ways to verify it.
As the dust of the news and live TV shows settles, one realises that producing hydrogen from water is not a new concept rather the World knows it by the name of electrolysis since 1800. Similarly running a car on hydrogen as its primary fuel is also not an innovation; rather two different types of technologies are already utilising hydrogen, both being available commercially. The first technology, a fuel cell, uses hydrogen and oxygen as its inputs and converts the energy released by its oxidation to electricity which is used to power a car through a motor. Hondas FCX Clarity is one among many cars using this technology.
The second technology simply relies on hydrogen as a fuel for combustion in an internal combustion engine. BMWs Hydrogen 7 uses hydrogen as one of its two distinct fuel sources. So the question remains, what could possibly be new about this sensational news? One has to rely for the information given by the inventor who claims that no energy is being created but a closed loop is converting water to hydrogen and oxygen (HHO) by electrolysis and the required electric current for this process is taken from the car battery.
Now the keen observer will notice the feedback loop in this arrangement. The car battery has a finite amount of charge stored in its cells and needs recharging for continued operation. If the electricity required for electrolysis was to be taken from this battery, it must be noted that in order to charge it you need the car to be running as the battery takes its charge from the cars generator. Now, not only is it known that electrolysis requires a lot of energy (in the form of electric current), but it is also known to be a notoriously inefficient process with the release of heat.
For a moment, not accounting for the inefficiencies and also for the conversion and other losses, say X amount of joules (the unit of energy) are required to separate Y number of hydrogen molecules from oxygen. These Y number of molecules of hydrogen as a source of energy can never generate energy more than X joules keeping the law of conservation of energy in mind. Practically it will be far less than X joules due to dissipation and conversion losses.
Now imagine if you were to again subtract X joules of energy from the generated energy in order to feed the electrolysis process, you would have a net deficit of energy. This could be made up for some time by the charge stored in the battery prior to electrolysis, which could be either by charging it from an external electric source or through the car while driving it on gasoline or another source. But this charge will soon deplete and the car would come to a halt. Now if someone wants to claim that it is possible to drive a car powered solely on water as a fuel he has to prove one thing, that the electrolysis process is not draining the battery, which in that case would be the actual source of energy and not water as claimed. (Not to mention that we are assuming that the car is not fitted with a hidden supply of fuel!)
This shouldnt have been a difficult task for either the claimant (Engineer Waqar) or the verifiers (PEC and PCSIR scientists and engineers) to prove, for instance by simply taking a reading of the batterys charge before and after the demonstrated drive. While one could think of many reasons why Engineer Waqar would not have liked to put his invention to such a litmus test, what could be the reason that the highest bodies of engineering and science in this country did not think rationally before beating the drum for him? Where they must be enthralled by the thought of defying basic laws of physics, cant they imagine the disgrace involved in promoting a centuries old idea as a novel invention?
History has it that the issue was picked up by our sensational media in no time and top anchors of the country were debating it at prime-time with our nations scientific and engineering heavyweights. There were some voices of reason but they were soon silenced by the more emotional and wishful thinkers. Now that Prof Dr Atta-ur-Rehman has flamboyantly challenged the idea on national television whereas Dr A Q Khan, Dr Manzoor Soomro and Dr Shoukat Parvez have put their weight behind it, it is to be seen whether a Nobel laureate in form of Engineer Waqar is in the making or another scandal of Watergate proportions which will discredit our scientific and engineering bodies.
The dilemma appears far bigger than this when one realises that neither our people as a nation, nor our leaders think rationally when it comes to vital choices ranging from choosing the rulers to the choice of the correct system and policies. As Dr Atta-ur-Rehman has spent the last decade in promoting higher education in Pakistan the prime objective of which is to instil rational thinking this perhaps explains his abrupt and emotional response.
In all likelihood the world will once again have to accept the bitter truth that water is not a fuel, it never has been one, and it never will be. Water does not burn as it is already burnt making it spent fuel. It is exhaust, the by-product of combustion. Yes, one of its constituents, hydrogen, is surely a fuel but that doesnt mean a lot. An apple suspended in air also has energy which it loses by falling to the ground and in order to re-energise it you need to put at least as much (in reality more) energy into the apple to bring it back to the same height. Same holds true for the hydrogen in water, it has lost its potential to serve as an energy source and needs re-energising.
After all, some might want to seek consolation in the fact that Pakistan will not be the first country to have flirted with the idea of using water as a fuel but right now is the last one in a long list. As for Engineer Waqar, if he got it right, he will at least come be known as the 21st century Einstein, but what if all this was just foul play? Will he be crowned as the next prime minister or president?
The writer is a doctoral fellow at United Nations University MERIT in the Netherlands and is working as an assistant professor at Muhammad Ali Jinnah University, Islamabad.
Our very own
