Mimicking Photosynthesis To Split Water

plantsdoitsocanwe writes "An international team of researchers led by Monash University has used chemicals found in plants to replicate a key process in photosynthesis, paving the way to a new approach that uses sunlight to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. The breakthrough could revolutionize the renewable energy industry by making hydrogen — touted as the clean, green fuel of the future — cheaper and easier to produce on a commercial scale." This was a laboratory demonstration only and the researchers say they need to bring up the efficiency.

Comments

Not new

[BhaKi]

This was a laboratory demonstration only and the researchers say they need to bring up the efficiency.

There have been numerous such laboratory demonstrations on different ways to produce hydrogen easily. But the attempts to bring up efficiency are just what failed.

Re:Not new

[quantumred]

I don't think so, although I initially thought the same thing.

The MIT process (from July 31 /.):
"..catalyst is made from cobalt, phosphate and an electrode that produces oxygen from water by using 90 percent less electricity than current methods, which use the costly metal platinum."

The Monash team (todays /.):
"..using just sunlight, an electrical potential of 1.2 volts and the very chemical that nature has selected for this purpose". The chemical seems to be "a form of manganese".

Not as good as advertised.

[the_povinator]

TFA says that a voltage of 1.2V is required, along with sunlight. The theoretical voltage required to split water is 1.23V. The energy supplied by the electrodes at 1.2V is obviously way more than you could practically retrieve from the H2 (which maxes out at 1.23V but you have to factor in efficiency). So this device is of no practical value even if scaled up. Online I see that as far back as 1981 (ahref=http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v46/i17/p1153_1rel=url2html-26843http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v46/i17/p1153_1>) a method was published that used sunlight and an electrode potential of 0.65V to split water. So I don't understand the fuss about the current paper.

Re:Not as good as advertised/ Fixed URL

[the_povinator]

http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v46/i17/p1153_1

Re:Cambrian Explosion of alternative energy techni

[budgenator]

Gas as in gasoline is rarer the hen's teeth in the US Army, the only place I remember it being used is in the mess for running stoves, ovens, and water heaters; and I retired back in 1985. I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't new stoves that ran on JP4, military jet fuel and or water-clear kerosene by now. Gasoline is just nasty dangerously flamable stuff especially around bombs and bullets.

Re:Cambrian Explosion of alternative energy techni

[n3tcat]

We still use JP for our mil vehicles, but we use a lot of NTVs (non tactical vehicles) now which are from I have seen over the last few years a fairly even mixture of gas and diesel.

The stoves, heaters, and yes, we have a/c now in even the training tents, all run off electricity which comes from generators that are fueled by something brought in by contracted companies. Diesel? Gas? I don't know because I haven't seen the paperwork for the contracts. It all depends on who we contract out for the generators and what kind of generators they bring in for us.

I think that was the biggest change in Army ideology over the last 20 years or so... they've shifted a huge portion of the green suiters' work onto civvie companies and contractors.

Re:Cambrian Explosion of alternative energy techni

[TapeCutter]

"How about we let them work out the bugs before posting to slashdot?"

What bugs? Did they NOT mimic photosynthisis? - Did you find a methodology error in their paper? Do you know of published contra-evidence?

"Seems a lot of the stories get posted to get into "the media" without having the required science/adverse analysis/hostile counterpoint process done."

The science has been published in a respected peer-reviewed journal and comes from two leading scientific institutions down here in Oz. Did you have some other 'process' in mind?

Re:Cambrian Explosion of alternative energy techni

[TapeCutter]

They are not claiming a breakthrough in energy production, they claim to have made a breakthrough in artificial photosynthisis, no small feat IMHO. Also the CSIRO are not in the habit of making unsubstantiated claims and their evidence has been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

It's pretty obvious you are looking for a different breakthrough and it's a certainty you won't find it if you are unwilling to entertain NEW knowledge that MAY be relevant.