Comments on: MIT makes energy breakthrough

By: jh

jh — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 07:21:52 +0000

I read about the problem of replicating photosynthesis in New Scientist> was a mystery how it occured at room temperature.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: jh

jh — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 07:20:03 +0000

“Nocera hopes that within 10 years, homeowners will be able to power their homes in daylight through photovoltaic cells, while using excess solar energy to produce hydrogen and oxygen to power their own household fuel cell. Electricity-by-wire from a central source could be a thing of the past.”

One day we will have to face the issue of property rights to sunlight.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: kahikatea

kahikatea — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 04:06:27 +0000

# frog Says:
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:59 pm

> kahikatea – just to be contrary, you would get 3 joules of diesel for each joule of electricity if you shut down Whirinaki. In fact, you’d get more than 3 joules.

Oops

And Whirinaki was also a bad example for me to use because it’s only a peaking generator.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Kevyn

Kevyn — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 03:45:47 +0000

Treehugger has a podcast interview with Nocera.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: bigblukiwi

bigblukiwi — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 00:06:51 +0000

Look to the source – the paper which will, or has been published, not the amateurish (US) report.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: bjchip

bjchip — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 21:35:02 +0000

It’s hard to read much into this. The details appear to be purposefully obscured or it was written by someone just starting as a journalist. It is clearly describing use of a catalyst that is NOT platinum to make Oxygen from water. What it is not doing is describing the reaction that is making that happen. I am incapable of understanding a method that makes ONLY O2 from H2O… and that is what is described here and then another reaction produces the H2????. I suspect that the article itself is at fault.

The simplest method of understanding this as a breakthrough is to recognize that the existing catalyst and reactions using Platinum are long and well known. That could not be the breakthrough. The reaction described as taking part in two stages is impossible in terms of physical chemistry. Making O2 HAS to make H2 at the same time.

respectfully
BJ

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: turnip28

turnip28 — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 16:28:01 +0000

I don’t see this as a breakthrough since they are talking about using platinum as catalyst.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: frog

frog — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 10:59:51 +0000

kahikatea – just to be contrary, you would get 3 joules of diesel for each joule of electricity if you shut down Whirinaki. In fact, you’d get more than 3 joules.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: kahikatea

kahikatea — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 05:37:39 +0000

still don’t reckon it could get you 3 joules of gas for every one joule of electricity, which is what you could get by closing down the whirinaki power station. (-;

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: frog

frog — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 04:16:12 +0000

samiuela – this is a far more energy efficient method of electrolysis that what we currently have, using widely available materials. It is a breakthrough of sorts, just not the silver bullet that these things always claim that they will be. It would still require a massive square metre area of solar PV to provide enough electricity to be converted for a home environment. That is not practical or economic as yet.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: samiam

samiam — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 00:28:26 +0000

or just flaring it off into nothing.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: kahikatea

kahikatea — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 00:17:35 +0000

and if we need energy in the form of burnable gas rather than electricity, by far the most efficient way to achieve this in the short term would be to stop burning natural gas to generate electricity.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: kahikatea

kahikatea — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 00:14:39 +0000

I have to agree with Samiuela. All it is is another way to convert energy in the single most easily-used form (electricity) into another form which has advantages in some situations but is generally a less useful form.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: samiuela

samiuela — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 21:51:11 +0000

It doesn’t really sound like an energy breakthrough, unless the process is more efficient than what electrolysis can currently achieve (the article didn’t mention if this was the case or not).

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Kevyn

Kevyn — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 12:18:17 +0000

As I see it the solution to converting hydrogen to useful energy is to blend it with piped natural gas and simply burn it in uncomplicated appliances like cookers, in-line water heaters and co-generation central heating furnaces.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)

By: Trevor29

Trevor29 — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 08:35:39 +0000

I agree about the hyperbole. “Mimic a plant’s enregy storage” is a bit misleading, given that plants don’t use electricity.

Current electrolysis systems are achieving 70-80% efficiency, so this may not be as big a breakthrough as they suggest. The bigger problems are in converting hydrogen to useful energy, which this does not address.

Trevor.

Like or Dislike: 0 0 (0)