Slashdot Mirror


Hydrogen-Emitting Microbe Examined

Concerned Onlooker wrote to mention an article at Science Daily discussing a microbe that lives in volcanic environments, which emits Hydrogen gas as a waste product. "As the world increasingly considers hydrogen as a potential biofuel, technology could benefit from having the genomes of such microbes. 'C. hydrogenoformans is one of the fastest-growing microbes that can convert water and carbon monoxide to hydrogen," remarks TIGR evolutionary biologist Jonathan Eisen, senior author of the PLoS Genetics study. "So if you're interested in making clean fuels, this microbe makes an excellent starting point.'"

6 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. So it "converts" ... by Ihlosi · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ... water (H2O) and carbon monoxide (CO) to Hydrogen (H2). What does it do with all the other atoms (one C, two O) ? Let me guess ... it makes carbon dioxide ?


  2. Insightfull my ass by penguinoid · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You are not going to get energy from CO2. At least not without burning something else, like magnesium. If you want to end the usage of fossil fuels, go nuclear (or solar).

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:Insightfull my ass by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That seems like a pretty ignorant stance your citizens are taking. The safest place to store nuclear waste is to put it back in the ground where you got it from. Why not just use old uranium mines to store the waste? It's not like anyone wants to live next to a uranium mine anyway.

  3. Re:Quick question by shawb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nope, they can't coexist (at least not function together.) This bacteria requires an anoxic environment, while the algae will release oxygen as a byproduct of photosynthysis.

    That said, I really don't think we can think of chemotrophs (organisms that survive by converting one chemical to another) as a very good energy source. Recreating their environment and feedstocks on an industrial scale would be very energy intensive. In the case of the bacteria in the article, even gathering and purifying the carbon monoxide from emissions of hydrocarbon burning energy plants would be quite energy inefficient. You can probably just forget about collecting the carbon monoxide from a car's tailpipe; it would be a total waste of energy.

    --
    I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
  4. Re:PBS NOVA ScienceNOW by penguinoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Currently, all our hydrogen comes from fossil fuels. But that's not a problem; hydrogen can be gotten in other ways. Until they can solve the hydrogen storage problem, I don't see hydrogen going anywhere (except through the tank walls). I think that for fuel cells, alcohol or methane would be better. For cars, use biodiesel, which works in unmodified diesel cars, or alcohol, or methane (methane and alcohol can be made from some waste products)

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  5. What the hell is that called? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When you read the article they have these things that look like explanatory hyperlinks to words like 'water', 'research' and 'scientists', but are, instead, commercials tied to the words. What is this called? Whatever it's called, it's VERY IRRITATING. And I wish Slashdot would not use submissions based on web pages that do this. When I am tricked into an advertisement this way I feel like I've crawled into bed with someone who suprises you with both male and female sex organs. It just doesn't seem right to be surprised like that.