Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Can Urine Rescue Hydrogen-Powered Cars?

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the use-every-part-of-the-animal dept.

Transportation 313

thecarchik writes with this interesting excerpt: "It takes a lot of energy to split hydrogen out from the other atoms to which it binds, either in natural gas or water. Which means energy analysts are skeptical about the overall energy balance of cars fueled by hydrogen. Ohio University researcher Geraldine Botte has come up with a nickel-based electrode to oxidize (NH2)2CO, otherwise known as urea, the major component of animal urine. Because urea's four hydrogen atoms are less tightly bound to nitrogen than the hydrogen bound to oxygen in water molecules, it takes less energy to break them apart."

cancel ×

313 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Can Urine Rescue Hydrogen-Powered Cars? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626351)

Only if they relax the drunk-driving laws. I don't see any other way the economics can work.

urinine (4, Funny)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626635)

the fuel will be called urinine, because after a lot of beer, I'm way way past urin8

Re:urinine (4, Funny)

Tanktalus (794810) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626681)

My urine goes to 11.

Re:urinine (5, Funny)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626811)

You guys should get together and form your own country. You can call it the Uri-nation.

Re:urinine (3, Funny)

vk2 (753291) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626837)

Why not just fly out and build a colony on Uranus?

Re:urinine (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28627041)

Why not just fly out and build a colony on Uranus?

These urine jokes are pissing me off. I'm going to go play my Nintendo Wii...

Re:urinine (-1, Redundant)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626905)

Do you happen to play in a band called Spinal Tap [wikipedia.org] ?

The more the Merrier (1)

StCredZero (169093) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626855)

Only if they relax the drunk-driving laws. I don't see any other way the economics can work.

Simple. Have one designated driver and three people on "fuel detail." This would make long distance road-trips more economical for college students. It's going to put a dent in Mickey's Big Mouth sales, though.

Re:Can Urine Rescue Hydrogen-Powered Cars? (2, Funny)

jslarve (1193417) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626901)

Not to mention that the cheesing community will be outraged.

The problem.... (1, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626361)

The problem isn't just getting the hydrogen, its storing and using it safely. This might make hydrogen dirt cheap, but it still doesn't really solve the problems that make hydrogen cars unworkable.

Re:The problem.... (4, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626563)

The problem isn't just getting the hydrogen, its storing and using it safely. This might make hydrogen dirt cheap, but it still doesn't really solve the problems that make hydrogen cars unworkable.

Are you the sort who gets up in the morning, observes that you are out of clean shirts, and trots off to do a quick load of laundry. But then say... "Hey, the problem here isn't just getting dressed, the car needs a boost and I can't remember where my wallet is." And then you lie back down in bed in defeat. The whole getting to work problem is just unworkable. ;)

When you have two problems and you solve one of them I'd call that progress.

The most common element in the universe is hydrogen. It will pay off in the long run to master using it for energy.

Re:The problem.... (0)

ground.zero.612 (1563557) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626897)

There is no problem storing hydrogen. In fact, I have direct evidence from high school AP science that shows unless you have a 2:1 oxygen:hydrogen ratio you really do not get much bang, if any at all.

The problem arises when you wish to store hydrogen next to oxygen. If you store twice as much oxygen next to hydrogen and have an accident, you can definitely have a big boom.

Urea? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626369)

first piss!

Re:Urea? (1, Interesting)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626589)

  1. You misspelled "frosty"
  2. You weren't the frost psot
  3. this comment is offtopic
  4. ??????????
  5. Profit?

Re:Urea? (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626875)

Errrm...stupid question, maybe, but....

How exactly is the GP offtopic?

Immature, maybe. But offtopic?

Hmm... (5, Funny)

XPeter (1429763) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626371)

Sperm and now urine? I'll take a guess and say the next article will be about crap.

Re:Hmm... (5, Funny)

hansraj (458504) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626449)

I'll take a guess and say the next article will be about crap.

I suppose that will be a shitty article.

Re:Hmm... (5, Funny)

amp001 (948513) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626777)

I'll take a guess and say the next article will be about crap.

I suppose that will be a shitty article.

Now, now -- there's no need to get pissy about it.

Re:Hmm... (1)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626887)

I've been thinking about ways to utilize human urine for energy for a while now... you can make very powerful high explosives out of it, if you could find a way to harness that, we could make our own fuel.

Re:Hmm... (1)

cephus (1471105) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626955)

And that would make it different from all the other articles because ... ?

Re:Hmm... (1)

jrmcc (703725) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626499)

Boy! that article would put me down in the dumps...

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626529)

I think your comment has started a movement...

Re:Hmm... (3, Insightful)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626549)

I'll take a guess and say the next article will be about crap.

Most of what's on the Internet qualifies, so I'd say that's a safe bet.

Re:Hmm... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626631)

Sperm and now urine? I'll take a guess and say the next article will be about crap.

Linux?

Re:Hmm... (0, Offtopic)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626763)

Oh yeah, real risky bet there...95% of Slashdot articles are about crap.

Re:Hmm... (1)

jayme0227 (1558821) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626939)

Wow, you must have a really high opinion of the remaining 5% if you're willing to wade through that much crap.

Re:Hmm... (3, Insightful)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28627009)

No, I just have a really low opinion of the value of my time.

New waste recycle plants? (3, Insightful)

Fallen Kell (165468) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626377)

Well, if this does work, it looks like the waste processing plants will get a complete overhaul. But that assumes there is a easy way to separate the urea from the water and other things that flow down the sewer lines....

Re:New waste recycle plants? (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626495)

But that assumes there is a easy way to separate the urea from the water and other things that flow down the sewer lines....

Of course there's an easy way. You have one line explicitly for liquid waste and another for solid waste. Problem solved!

I didn't say it would be cheap. I only gave an easy solution to the problem.

Re:New waste recycle plants? (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626859)

It would probably be easier to ignore the human waste stream and just force farmers who are being taxed for their cow farts to build lagoons to catch the animal wastes and pump that to the processor plant.

Re:New waste recycle plants? (4, Funny)

Electrawn (321224) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626605)

Urea is a common component in a lot of industrial applications, notably cosmetics, soap and animal feed. No need to really source it from the sewer, industrial vats make this stuff every day.

Telling women what exactly "Urea" is in the ingredients of their makeup case is great fun...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urea [wikipedia.org]

Re:New waste recycle plants? (5, Insightful)

Rei (128717) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626877)

And therein lies the rub. It's way too expensive and inefficient to recover from natural sources (it makes up ~2% of urine, mixed in with ~3% "other"), so we make it synthetically from ammonia. Which is made via the Haber process. Which in turn use coal or natural gas as feedstocks. Gee, that's really going to solve the efficiency problem right there...

Re:New waste recycle plants? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626909)

Telling women what exactly "Urea" is in the ingredients of their makeup case is great fun...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urea [wikipedia.org]

I get the impression you don't get out much...;)

Re:New waste recycle plants? (1, Insightful)

jayme0227 (1558821) | more than 5 years ago | (#28627067)

If the energy use in making the urea industrially is greater than the energy gain from extracting the hydrogen from urea, then you're back at square one. I can't verify that this is the case necessarily, but it is one thing to consider.

Re:New waste recycle plants? (1)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626935)

If it can really be efficiently produced from urine, we should be able to collect all we need from factory pig and dairy farms.

Re:New waste recycle plants? (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626989)

Nah, just drive down any major highway with a lot of long-haul trucking. You can be sure that before you run out, you'll find another 2-Liter bottle of the stuff by the side of the road.

Bathrooms (1)

Afforess (1310263) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626389)

This would only work if I was paid to use the bathroom. Otherwise, I'd be flushing money down the toilet.

Re:Bathrooms (1)

fastest fascist (1086001) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626607)

I'm pretty sure you are actaully paying to use the bathroom. Someone processes your wastewater, and they don't do it for free. Unless, of course, you just dump all that shit in a river or something. In any case, if the waste facilities could extract the urine and sell it off, maybe the costs to you could be lowered as well. Something tells me there are issues with extracting it from sewage, though.

Oh sure! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626397)

So you finally figure out a way to get rid of us Interstate Rest Area workers. Now that everyone can piss in their gas tanks you won't *need* us to clean the restrooms at rest areas because you won't need the rest areas. Thanks for making me lose my job!!!

Re:Oh sure! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626455)

Don't worry. I'm sure you still can hang around the rest areas and make some money.

Take that you punk kids! (5, Funny)

greatica (1586137) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626399)

Try pissing in my gas tank now!

Humm, if Bio Diesel Cars smell like French Fries (5, Funny)

Virtucon (127420) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626429)

The cars powered by this will smell like Bourbon Street.

Uh, the chemistry (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626431)

I did chemistry nine years ago, however with regards to this sentence: "Because urea's four hydrogen atoms are less tightly bound to nitrogen than the hydrogen bound to oxygen in water molecules, it takes less energy to break them apart."

Isn't it so that the energy of activation is rather irrelevant once you have a reaction going, because whatever energy is added to push them over the energy hurdle is released once the molecule separates? The only effect of a catalyst, if I remember correctly, is to reduce the energy hurdle, but it does not increase the amount of energy released (except perhaps through thermal efficiency).

Re:Uh, the chemistry (1)

Virtucon (127420) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626543)

So what your saying is that if you put a blue urinal cake in the gas tank it'll take less energy to make hydrogen? Nice..

Way Cool (4, Funny)

flaming error (1041742) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626435)

Cool. We burn our pee in the car, collect pure water from the tailpipe, drink the water and pee again.

Perpetual urination FTW.

Re:Way Cool (2, Interesting)

Sefi915 (580027) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626671)

Unfortunately, it wouldn't be a 100% efficient cycle.

Due to human perspiration and respiration, not all of the water ingested by the driver/passengers/donors/etc would be returned as urea.

Re:Way Cool (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626853)

You're a fucking boring tool.

Re:Way Cool (2, Funny)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626937)

So will we now refer to this loss of efficiency as "piss off"?

Just 0.037 Volts... (2, Interesting)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626443)

Because urea's four hydrogen atoms are less tightly bound to nitrogen than the hydrogen bound to oxygen in water molecules, it takes less energy to break them apart."

Apparently, a lot less. From TFA: "Just 0.037 Volts need to be applied across the cell, against the 1.23 Volts needed to break down water."

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (4, Insightful)

blueg3 (192743) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626573)

When did they make volts a unit of energy?

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626783)

When did they make volts a unit of energy?

It's a conspiracy by the anti-battery lobby. Like my "D" cell is 1.5 Volts and my "AAA" is also 1.5 Volts.
They are the same battery! and since 1.5 x 8 = 12 Volts... I just hook up eight or nine AAA batteries in series and my car is running just fine

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626805)

What they didn't tell you is that it takes about 33 times longer. They're not sure why, though.

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (1)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626881)

Because theromodynamics != kinetics

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (2, Insightful)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626899)

And I can't spell ; (

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626861)

Assuming the natural conversion factor of the elementary charge, Volts is just as good an indicator as Joules. In fact, that's why they make the eV. You could say, "electron-volts per electron," but that's just silly.

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (1)

thisnamestoolong (1584383) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626913)

I see this one all the time -- using volts as a unit of energy is like measuring the flow of a river by how fast it flows without measuring the volume of the flow -- voltage is the electromotive force, which when multiplied by the current (measured in amperes, or amps), will give you the power, which you measure in watts. Very simple, but a huge number of people fail to grasp this.

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (4, Insightful)

Sandbags (964742) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626831)

I don't care how much less it is... There is simply not enough urea made in the entire country on a daily bases to produce enough H2 for fuel for even a small city.

Really, how many gallons a day do you piss? Considder then that urea is only a fractional percentage of that pee. (about 95% of typical urine is water, the rest is a combination of mostly urea as well as other contaminants removed by the kidneys).

I'd have to piss somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 gallons a day to have enough fuel just to handle my daily commute. Then there's the energy loss seperating the urea at the water treatment plant, hooking houses on septic up to sewers to collect the additional urine (about 35% of the country doens't have a sewer), then transport of the seperated urea to an H2 processing plant, and THEN, what do you plan to DO with the H2? We can't afford to run it in our cars... (current fuel cells cost about $750,000 once you take away the government subsidies. They THINK they can make em for about $100,000 in 15-20 years....

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626947)

I'd have to piss somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 gallons a day to have enough fuel just to handle my daily commute

Do you drive a tank? seriously I drive a diesel Excursion which gets about 20 miles to the gallon, so I would have to commute 800 miles to burn 40 gallons? Even if I drove the gas version, which I believe gets around 10 miles to the gallon I would still need to log 200 miles both ways to hit that mark.

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (2, Funny)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626967)

I'd have to piss somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 gallons a day to have enough fuel just to handle my daily commute.

So that just gives you an(other) excuse to get very drunk at work. :)

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (1)

scorp1us (235526) | more than 5 years ago | (#28627035)

This is the Bender principal. Not only do you consume alcohol for fuel, but you get to go on a "bender" every day!

Re:Just 0.037 Volts... (1)

cellurl (906920) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626991)

My thoughts exactly. I can make hydrogen via electrolysis with a solar panel. Then use a compressor (US$10k...) to make a tank full. My calculations said 1 acre (I have 6 acres...) covered with solar panels would yield enough hydrogen to drive free forever. Beat that Urea. or better yet, Fund that Obama.

Hydrogen still? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626463)

I thought everyone abandoned the whole hydrogen thing... electric is good and mass transit is better, why is hydrogen still seen as some sort of viable alternative?

Re:Hydrogen still? (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626703)

electric is good and mass transit is better

Not in my town it isn't. We have three coal fired generators and a brand new natural gas generator; an electric car wouldn't decrease greenhouse gasses or other pollutants. Bus service works fine in milder climates, but it gets damned hot and damned cold here and nobody's going to want to wait half an hour in 20 degree f weather or 95 degree f weather, or in the rain; the busses stink; and they usually don't have meany passengers. I alone in my car put far less carbon in the atmosphere than the three passengers and the driver in that big stinkey bus.

Re:Hydrogen still? (1)

Rei (128717) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626969)

Not in my town it isn't. We have three coal fired generators and a brand new natural gas generator;

Your town is not an island. Nationwide, on our current grid, according to the DOE, EVs decrease CO2 emissions by 27%, slightly increase PM, keep SOx the same, slightly decrease NOx, nearly eliminate CO and VOCs, and move all emissions away from surface level, right next to where people are breathing it in. Sounds like a win to me.

I agree with you about busses, mind you.

Re:Hydrogen still? (1)

just_another_sean (919159) | more than 5 years ago | (#28627093)

Bus service works fine in milder climates, but it gets damned hot and damned cold here and nobody's going to want to wait half an hour ...

If you have to wait a half an hour then it's not "fine" bus service. I lived in Toronto for about 10 years and it gets pretty bad in the winter but between stops or stations on every corner and the bus and subway systems being so regular mass transit was actually a joy compared to struggling in traffic. I'd say the only exception was being out on a late night bender after the subway closed and the buses* slowed down. But then again I never got a DUI waiting for a late night bus and if I had the money to burn the taxis are everywhere and available 24/7.

Mass transit is not so bad as long is it is done right...

*affectionately known as the vomit comet!

Re:Hydrogen still? (1)

Rei (128717) | more than 5 years ago | (#28627101)

why is hydrogen still seen as some sort of viable alternative?

It's not. But when you give out literally billions of dollars to businesses for hydrogen research and investment, you shouldn't be shocked when they fight against the death of that tech. See buggy whips.

Hydrogen articles are going to keep popping up for years.

This must be a... (1)

ettlz (639203) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626473)

...piss-take.

The only problem I see is that... (2, Funny)

bryan_is_a_kfo (976654) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626487)

Peeing in my neighbors gas tank will no longer have the desired effect.

Energy balance of using urea? (3, Insightful)

PeterM from Berkeley (15510) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626503)

I can see two possible problems with this. Urea is a product of amino acid metabolization, in other words, protein breakdown. Somehow I think it'd take quite a lot of energy to provide the protein to provide the urea.

Second problem, what're the reaction by-products? That wasn't clear in the article. If nitrogen gas is a by-product, that basically reverses the very energy intensive process of fixing nitrogen. We'd be better off using the urea as fertilizer to grow food rather than as fuel.

--PM

Re:Energy balance of using urea? (1)

schon (31600) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626705)

Urea is a product of amino acid metabolization, in other words, protein breakdown. Somehow I think it'd take quite a lot of energy to provide the protein to provide the urea.

Egads, you're right!

Now that we know this, every mammal on the planet will stop producing urea because it's inefficient!

Re:Energy balance of using urea? (1)

DeadChobi (740395) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626999)

We produce Urea because it's a much safer thing to transport through the bloodstream than the ammonia which is produced by the body's metabolization of proteins.

A case of made up again. (4, Insightful)

vuo (156163) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626709)

You're right about the energy balance for the wrong reasons, and also the article submitter has screwed up. No one is suggesting urine, which the journalist made up on the spot, and which fails the capacity requirement to boot. The pure industrial chemical urea is mostly produced synthetically from ammonia and carbon dioxide, and ammonia is made from hydrogen and nitrogen. Hydrogen is currently produced mostly from natural gas and similar sources, which means it won't solve anything, and the carbon dioxide should be non-fossil also for the carbon cycle to be closed. In summary, what we have here is another way to produce synthetic fuel from natural gas or carbonaceous masses like coal or organic matter. The good thing is that the fuel precursor is noncombustible; the bad is that it's completely unproven and even hypothetical, and its energy density is not known.

I can't wait... (1)

alphabet26 (534873) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626519)

I look forward to the day that pissing in a gas tank just might help you get to your next gas station.

Running low on fuel (1)

Orion Blastar (457579) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626533)

just pee into the gas tank. Bring your dog or cat with you, and have them pee into the gas tank as well.

Urine powered automobiles for teh win!

Re:Running low on fuel (1)

greatica (1586137) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626849)

Diabetics will become increasingly popular in juvenile crowds for the sugar in the tank prank.

But how will this impact DUI laws?... (1)

the_Librarian (17089) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626541)

Officer: "Sir, you are operating this vehicle under the influence of alcohol, please come with me to the station."

Driver: "Honest, officer, that 12-pack I just drank was just to get enough urine to get home!"

Re:But how will this impact DUI laws?... (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626727)

Officer: next time try COFFEE. Now put your hands behind your back...

You can't buy beer, you can only rent it.

So, let me get this straight. (1)

Rei (128717) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626553)

We first just need to build urine collectors for livestock to separate the urine from the other waste. We then need to run this through a urine-tolerant reverse osmosis system and concentrate the solution from the ~5% solution it starts at. We then need to extract the urea from the salts and proteins (which make up more of urine per mass than urea does). We then need to use energy to separate the urea (just not as much with water). And this is supposed to solve an efficiency problem?

Yawn.

Think about it this way: if urea was actually a reasonable energy source, we'd already be concentrating it and burning it for power.

WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626571)

"It takes a lot of energy to split hydrogen out from the other atoms to which it binds [...] Which means energy analysts are skeptical about the overall energy balance of cars fueled by hydrogen

Are you stupid? The energy is released when hydrogen and oxygen are recombined into water. Hydrogen isn't an energy source. It's a form of energy storage.

I am so sorry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626581)

Wii would like to drive

Another stupid analysis (2, Insightful)

Fooby (10436) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626617)

Urea will never be a significant energy source. Think about it, cars use far more energy than the total caloric intake of an animal (human or otherwise) per day. Yet WASTE product is supposed to supply all the energy needs of our vehicles?

Secondly, this would directly compete with our food sources even more so than biodiesel already does. Urea is a nitrogen fertilizer source that is in short supply. We already manufacture most of the world's urea supply from atmospheric nitrogen using up energy (mostly natural gas) in the process.

So in short, while this research may be of practical and academic interest, it is not going to usher in a new era of piss-powered cars.

Okay, so they don't need our sperm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626621)

Looks like women will have a reason to keep men around after all.

No officer, I'm just refuelling the car (1)

petes_PoV (912422) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626637)

This technology is going to need an awful lot of pee. 60 litres in an average tank - that's all got to come from someone's (or something's bladder) Even if you only fill up once a month, that's 2 litres a day - which is pretty much what we're recommended as a daily fluid intake (depends on body mass, age etc.). Plus, of course the urea content of the average whizz is nowhere near 100%, and when sweating and vapour in breath is included we're going to need all the urine from every driver and all the passengers - just to keep our cars on the road.

The biggest problem I can see, is that if we are all producing the fuel to run our cars, how are the government every going to tax it? None of the solutions seems that pleasant!

This Title is Whack, Yo. (1)

Akir (878284) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626641)

Urea, commercially used, is synthesized. You'll find that many shampoo products have urea in them. I don't think that people would like to put piss on their heads.

Re:This Title is Whack, Yo. (1)

Macthorpe (960048) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626981)

You haven't been on the internet long enough, apparently.

Re:This Title is Whack, Yo. (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626983)

You really need to see more of the internet. (or, maybe not...)

Cool! (1)

orignal (10769) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626645)

So now there is an excuse to drive my car when I'm completely pissed!

How old are you? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626653)

>Seventeen.

Piss in the fuel tank.

I love this idea (2, Interesting)

ZeroSerenity (923363) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626657)

I'd never have to stop driving to relieve myself again. Just make sure I've got plenty of water handy.

Re:I love this idea (1)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 5 years ago | (#28627097)

Unless you have a long tube connected to the gas tank, you'll still have to stop.

Attendants (1)

RichM (754883) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626759)

This would be hilarious as a petrol station attendant.
"Lovely Mayback sir, mind if I piss in the tank?"
"Go ahead son, fill her up!"

hehe... (1)

Malenx (1453851) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626781)

URICA!

What if ? (2, Interesting)

dword (735428) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626825)

... we run out of water, because we drink it all and instead of peeing it back on Mother Nature we break it into other particles?
While this sounds rather strange, you should realize that it's only a matter of "when?" instead of "will it?" Just for the heck of it, does anyone have any idea how this period can be computed?

But what's left? (1)

scorp1us (235526) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626865)

Looking at it, after your strip the 4 O atoms, it looks like you'd get 2CO + N2 (carbon monoxide and Nitrogen gas). Anyone know what the real reaction would be? NO2 + C? (could you then feed the NO2 into your engine, or yourself?)

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28626907)

Future filling station: two guys at the side of the road with a keg of beer.

I know someone who will save our Earth (1)

No2Gates (239823) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626941)

My wife is going to be the Energy SuperHeroine. She has to pee about 20 times a day. She has a bathroom stall in WalMart reserved for her on the weekends.

It burns when I pee (4, Funny)

bperkins (12056) | more than 5 years ago | (#28626971)

but in this case it's a good thing.

Reminds me of that BP joke... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28627075)

Reminds me of that BP joke...

you remember. Empty tank, swarm of bees...

Yes but... (1)

British (51765) | more than 5 years ago | (#28627091)

...who control barter town?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>