Why bother with h2o2? Straight O2 would result in even higher temperatures.
LO2 or LOX is a wee bit spendy/tough to store in sufficient volume and/
or for any extended time, whereas a composite reinforced storage tank
of high-test h2o2 is good for at least a month at a time without
losing 10% of its poop (possibly as little as -5%/month).
Why add another two more water molecules to the reaction and have to heat
them up as well?
h2o2 + whatever else you're getting rid of is by far as hot and nasty
enough. Ceramics is certainly a good application, but perhaps not
quite O2 good enough, and having to run fuel rich is somewhat going in
the wrong direction.
Of course, straight O2 is a bit hard to package in a vehicle, so use LOX.
It's about as easy to come by as hi-grade h2o2. I mean, if you're going to
dream, dream big.
I agree that a big dream needs a big goal. However, why not go for an
obtainable goal by simply sticking with whatever works damn nicely as
a liquid h2o2 fuel energy booster as is, thus going ahead without our
having to reinvent the entire wheel.
- Brad Guth -