Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hydrogen-Emitting Microbe Examined

Posted by Zonk on from the such-lovely-genetics dept.

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.'"

21 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Quick question by penguinoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Where does the carbon monoxide come from?

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:Quick question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Incomplete oxidation of carbon fuels.

      So, while you might be quick to think "we still need to burn fossil fuels to produce this hydrogen", the point is, currently it's a WASTE material.
      And besides, that, Its a nice carbon fixer.

      In theory, these bacteria could be burned to produce more carbon monoxide (of course, that's just speculation, but I assume they're carbon based life forms).

    2. Re:Quick question by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 4, Interesting
      In theory, these bacteria could be burned to produce more carbon monoxide

      Somehow I doubt that this would produce enough carbon monoxyde to keep the cycle going. You know, perpetuum mobiles and all (laws of physics apply to living creatures too!). Btw, it has already been tried with other critters.

    3. Re:Quick question by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 5, Informative

      So, while you might be quick to think "we still need to burn fossil fuels to produce this hydrogen", the point is, currently it's a WASTE material.

      That's in the eye of the beholder. Solid oxide fuel cells can use carbon monoxide as fuel just as well as hydrogen. Carbon monoxide is a fairly energy rich substance. The guy who first prepared it in 1776 by heating ZnO and coke even thought he had made hydrogen because the blue flame it produces is so similar. I don't have numbers for CO and H2 handy, and if I did I'd be too lazy to check, but I'd suspect that burning a mole of CO releases more energy than burning a mole of H2, just by virtue of the fact that this bacterium makes its living converting H2O + CO -> CO2 + H2.

      I assume they're carbon based life forms

      Of course they are. Carbon monoxide is a fairly energy rich substance and is surprisingly inert. It kills you by forming a stable complex with the hemoglobin in your blood. It adheres to binding sites meant for oxygen (cyanide has an even greater affinity) and ruins the entire hemoglobin molecule. Bacteria generally have no use for oxygen binding and transport proteins, and do not use hemoglobin or any other heme-containing protein (except for nitrogen-fixing bacteria), so in general one would not expect them to care about carbon monoxide- although being able to eat it is impressive.

    4. Re:Quick question by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 3, Informative

      In industry, this process is called a water gas shift reaction. This is a *very* mature technology which has been used since the days of gas lighting.

      CO + H20 -> CO2 + H2

      This wouldn't be the first microbe investigated to replace water gas shift reactors, but previous examples would need to come a long way to even approach the economy of the inorganic method.

    5. 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
  2. Excellent! by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now we can invent cars that run purely on the farts of microbes.

  3. Working temperature? by hunte · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is a nice job for a microbe, but I don't have see any information about the working temperature that this microbe needs to make the chemical process... Maybe this could be another problem... The volcanic habitat it's very hot (and hard to emulate)...

    --
    about me A - B
    1. Re:Working temperature? by squoozer · · Score: 3, Informative

      It might live near a volcano. It doesn't live in it! Even the most extreme extremophile is only able to withstand aroudn 120 degC. Nothing like the 700+ found in the heart of volcanos. The environment might be hard to replicate but not because of the temperature. More likely it will be hard to replicate because we probably don't properly understand the chemistry of the bacterias natural environment.

      --
      I used to have a better sig but it broke.
    2. Re:Working temperature? by budgenator · · Score: 3, Informative

      Certainly if by survive you mean supendining metabolic activity, in a bacteria context it's called sporulative form as oppose to spores in fungi which is more of a "seed-like" form. The bacteria in the article are spore orming, When growing conditions aren't right, they form spores and go into a hardened form of bacteria "suspended animation" until conditions improve. Anthrax does this as the article mentions, I've heard of anthrax spores being infective on the order of decades.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  4. 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 ?


    1. Re:So it "converts" ... by squoozer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is just a bacterial version of the water-gas shift reaction. What makes people think that a microbe is going to be any more efficient that a big hunk of specially designed plant (sorry for the pun).

      The bacteria might be cheap but it comes with a huge amount of overhead in terms of having to maintain all its cellular functions. I bet half it's energy is wated multiplying.

      --
      I used to have a better sig but it broke.
    2. Re:So it "converts" ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I bet half it's energy is wasted multiplying.

      I have the same problem...
  5. Eh? by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the opening of the article:

    Take a pot of scalding water, remove all the oxygen, mix in a bit of poisonous carbon monoxide, and add a pinch of hydrogen gas. It sounds like a recipe for a witch's brew. It may be, but it is also the preferred environment for a microbe known as Carboxydothermus hydrogenoformans.

    If you remove the oxygen, won't you be left with Hydrogen anyway?

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
    1. Re:Eh? by Walkiry · · Score: 4, Informative

      >If you remove the oxygen, won't you be left with Hydrogen anyway?

      It was referring to the atmospheric oxygen (O2). This microbe is anaerobic.

      --
      ---- Take the Space Quiz!
  6. A reverse form of catalytic converter by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This can be used for another form of Hydrogen Boost for Truckers. Instead of using electicity and water, it can use water, exaust gas, and microbe. Not only will it further reduce emissions by using them to produce hydrogen.

    --
    Fight Spammers!
  7. A few questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is very interesting indeed. A low-energy process by which free hydrogen can be produced. But a few questions.

    - The article mentions that oxygens need to be removed from the water; How much energy does this require?
    - In what quantities is the hydrogen produced; What quantities is needed to power a fuel cell?
    - How efficient is this process compared to electrolysis.

    Also it says that the water needs to be boiling in order for the microbes to have optimal conditions; But then of course the energy has to come from somewhere. The water might be heated using solar or wind power i guess. Which brings us back to to the storage problem, and most hydrogen storage solutions(not based on pressure-tanks) require heat to release the hydrogen.

  8. Mods on crack? by MaelstromX · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No, the article says that the organism intakes CO and H2O and expels H2. This does not mean that a simple reaction occurs with CO and H2O as reactants and H2 as a product.

    From TFA:

    The bug boasts at least five different forms of a protein machine, dubbed carbon monoxide deyhydrogenase, that is able to manipulate the poisonous gas. Each form of the machine appears to allow the organism to use carbon monoxide in a different way. Most other organisms that live on carbon monoxide have only one form of this machine. In other words, while other organisms may have the equivalent of a modest mixing bowl to process their supper of carbon monoxide, this species has a veritable food processor, letting it gorge on a hot spring buffet all day.

    So apparently the CO is acted upon by the proteins, and likely the H2O is used to sustain other life processes in some other way, and the H2 is simply the end result of some metabolic process at the end. If you want to account for the C and the O's, they probably went into forming some protein somewhere.

    --
    audioLibre - freedom of music
  9. Prior art by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 3, Funny
    Unfortuately, when this gets in to the wild, it mutates into a microbe that eats plastic, and aeoroplanes drop from the sky like stones.

    As described in a 1950's science fiction story.

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  10. Not new, but maybe promising by jxm387 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When I worked at Mobil as an engineer (before Exxon swalled them) there was a project working on microbes that consumed CO2 and excreted long chain hydrocarbons that could be used as fuel. Unfortunately they were slow and difficult to control. I imagine that microbes thriving under volcanic conditions would be hard to use commercially, but perhaps the conditions could be replicated in certain settings or the mechanism transplanted into other microbes (any microbiologists want to comment?). The ideas are good but the technology is a long way off!

  11. 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.