for you knuckledraggings tards that havnt seen it yet.. improved electrolysis

[Milo Hobgoblin]

A liquid catalyst was added to water before electrolysis to achieve what the researchers claim is almost 100-percent efficiency. When combined with photovoltaic cells to store energy chemically, the resulting solar energy systems could generate electricity around the clock, the MIT team said.

"The hard part of getting water to split is not the hydrogen -- platinum as a catalyst works fine for the hydrogen. But platinum works very poorly for oxygen, making you use much more energy," said MIT chemistry professor Daniel Nocera. "What we have done is made a catalyst work for the oxygen part without any extra energy. In fact, with our catalyst almost 100 percent of the current used for electrolysis goes into making oxygen and hydrogen."


http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=209900956&cid=NL_eet

NO you still cant "run your car on water" BUT this will get us a lot closer to efficient H2 systems used in combinations with other technologies and make these systems more affordable to mere mortals..

dont you all love how they tied it into solar to sell it to the green idiots. LMFAO.

good stuff though.. this is a pretty big breakthrough

[Red Morgan]

Just think of all the body hair you can remove with that advanced electrolysis.

[Capricious]

hey, I may be a knuckledragger, but im certainly not a tard, good sir.

[Mulambo]

http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=209900956&cid=NL_eet

dont you all love how they tied it into solar to sell it to the green idiots. LMFAO.

good stuff though.. this is a pretty big breakthrough

Solar energy is what the masses crave.

(and plants)

[Khumash-Gor]

sweet. one step closer to galactic conquest.

[Durindana]

what color idiot are you not to realize that electricity for electrolysis has to come from either 1) renewable sources or 2) non-renewable sources? There's little point in an entirely new, ground-up H2 infrastructure if we're just going to trade internal combustion for a death-spewing coal powerplant.

The solar reference could be subbed out for nuclear, wave, whatever, just so long as it's not something that's a shitty alternative to gasoline combustion

[Mulambo]

what color idiot are you not to realize that electricity for electrolysis has to come from either 1) renewable sources or 2) non-renewable sources? There's little point in an entirely new, ground-up H2 infrastructure if we're just going to trade internal combustion for a death-spewing coal powerplant.

The solar reference could be subbed out for nuclear, wave, whatever, just so long as it's not something that's a shitty alternative to gasoline combustion

well, it increases efficiency no matter what the powar source is.

[Milo Hobgoblin]

what color idiot are you not to realize that electricity for electrolysis has to come from either 1) renewable sources or 2) non-renewable sources? There's little point in an entirely new, ground-up H2 infrastructure if we're just going to trade internal combustion for a death-spewing coal powerplant.

The solar reference could be subbed out for nuclear, wave, whatever, just so long as it's not something that's a shitty alternative to gasoline combustion

^^^^^^
like I said.. the green idiots would love the solar tie in..

look moron I dont really fucking care.. I was just posting it for you all to see. Let your visionary genius take you wherever you want to go.

and I know most of you arent knuckledragging idiots.. if you were I wouldnt have even posted it.. its just fun to type

[Weeking]

For batteries of various kinds, if they fix the storage problem. I guess they could store the hydrogen in balloons if there's open air for it.

Maybe they could even make a zeppelin that harnesses the power of lightning/solar power or some other energy source then converts it to hydrogen which it uses to refill the balloon, allowing it to change altitude repeatedly and go higher and still keep the pressure up.

[Mulambo]

Maybe they could even make a zeppelin that harnesses the power of lightning/solar power or some other energy source then converts it to hydrogen which it uses to refill the balloon, allowing it to change altitude repeatedly and go higher and still keep the pressure up.And also cause lightning strikes??/

[Jezrith]

http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=209900956&cid=NL_eet


That's fucking awesome! Energy efficient hydro-electrolysis is where its at!


NO you still cant "run your car on water" BUT this will get us a lot closer to efficient H2 systems used in combinations with other technologies and make these systems more affordable to mere mortals..


Its not really the cost, its the fact that currently, the energy coefficient is just to low right now to make it worthwhile as a source of energy. This will go a long way to fixing that problem.

[Mippoose]

I feel like the OP thinks he's smarter cuz he has a link.

I hate people like him.

[Malhavok]

One minor obstacle down, major hurdle to go. Whoopdy-doo they've increased efficiency on a near useless means of storing energy from 50-70% to near 100%. Now we just need to stick an 800 pound tank in the trunk and refuel every hundred or so miles.

[[LoD] EE]

Finally someone quotes something from my webpage. :)

[alfaroverall]

And why can't we know what the catalyst is, or at least a general description of what it is? Most inorganic catalysts (which this almost undoubtedly is; organic catalysts would be torn apart by an electrolytic situation) are fairly simple. Some are single elements, such as platinum or vanadium. Others are simple salts, such as iron (III) chloride. Only once you venture into the world of enzymes do you get into "a freshman chemistry student in college can't understand what you're talking about" territory.

[Durindana]

One minor obstacle down, major hurdle to go. Whoopdy-doo they've increased efficiency on a near useless means of storing energy from 50-70% to near 100%. Now we just need to stick an 800 pound tank in the trunk and refuel every hundred or so miles.

I was reading something in the Times the other day about BMW's H2-powered prototypes... they have a fleet of I think 750's with V12's that have both gas and H2 tanks and can switch (while driving!) between the two on the same engine. How they do that I have no idea. The range on H2 didn't seem that bad though, especially if there wasn't a giant gas tank taking up space and weight.

Worst part, though, was they detuned the engine to produce in gas mode only as much power as it did in H2 mode (so there wouldn't be a huge discrepancy). The regular gas V12 makes something like 430 HP - these cars weigh like 3 tons - but these rides got bitched down to like 230 (!). that sucks. a fucking normally-aspirated 4-cylinder S2000 gets 230 HP. way better mileage too

[Mippoose]

Alfaroverall should win the prize of trying to sound like the smartest man alive.

Arrogant punk.

[Malhavok]

According to wiki it's also 550 pounds heavier than a normal v12 7 series and has a 125 mile range. The only twist it has is storing liquid hydrogen. Not sure how they keep the temps down, but I'm sure it's expensive. How many thousands more for lackluster performance and 125 mile range on my already north of $100,000 car? No thanks.

[alfaroverall]

According to wiki it's also 550 pounds heavier than a normal v12 7 series and has a 125 mile range. The only twist it has is storing liquid hydrogen. Not sure how they keep the temps down, but I'm sure it's expensive. How many thousands more for lackluster performance and 125 mile range on my already north of $100,000 car? No thanks.
Pressure, not temperature. This is much more efficient.

Anyhow, I got pulled away before I could edit my previous post. I see that later in the article they did state what the catalyst is. So I retract my previous statement.
Alfaroverall should win the prize of trying to sound like the smartest man alive.

Arrogant punk.
...? I wasn't trying to sound smart. In fact, I was indicating that anyone who has taken a basic college-level general chemistry course can pretty much comprehend the composition of inorganic catalysts. They might have no idea how they do what they do, or even that they do what they do, but they can understand what they are at the very least.

[Mulambo]

I wasn't trying to sound smart. In fact, I was indicating that anyone who has taken a basic college-level general chemistry course can pretty much comprehend the composition of inorganic catalysts.

w/e smartypants college boy.

[Milo Hobgoblin]

w/e smartypants college boy.

LMFAO!

[Steelbadger]

http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=209900956&cid=NL_eet

NO you still cant "run your car on water" BUT this will get us a lot closer to efficient H2 systems used in combinations with other technologies and make these systems more affordable to mere mortals..

dont you all love how they tied it into solar to sell it to the green idiots. LMFAO.

good stuff though.. this is a pretty big breakthrough

That's old news in the science community.

September 1997 issue of Transition Metal Chemistry had an article about the chemical oxidation of water to dioxygen. Homogeneous catalysis by a ruthenium aquo-complex.

Ok, the MIT dudes aren't using the same catalyst but it is essentially the same result.

[Slypieguy]

Just think of all the body hair you can remove with that advanced electrolysis.

That's what I was hoping this thread would be about :(

Never having to shave again would be awesome

[Milo Hobgoblin]

That's old news in the science community.

September 1997 issue of Transition Metal Chemistry had an article about the chemical oxidation of water to dioxygen. Homogeneous catalysis by a ruthenium aquo-complex.

Ok, the MIT dudes aren't using the same catalyst but it is essentially the same result.

I think the big breakthrough is its efficiency and low price.. as previous catalysts were somewhat expensive and/or prone to degradation...

in any case its still really interesting and just another peice of the puzzle.

[Malhavok]

Pressure, not temperature. This is much more efficient.

Define efficient. Cost efficient or energy density efficient? It may be more expensive to liquify nitrogen as reverse heat engines are horribly ineffective when getting down towards 30K. On the other hand the density is obviously much higher than compressed H2. With compressed H2 you have the problem of tanks (5,000 and 10,000 PSI tanks are NOT cheap) and pumping costs, which again at those pressures is not trivial. With liquified H2 you have the cooling cost and evaporation. Liquefied is definitely preferential in terms of energy density and safety although my uninformed guess is that it would also be more expensive.