Slashdot Mirror


Spinach Could Be Used For Hydrogen Fuel

An anonymous reader writes "If Popeye had made alternative fuels, he'd have probably come up with something like this. Researchers from Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) have developed a system that converts solar energy directly into hydrogen using the common spinach plant."

76 of 105 comments (clear)

  1. Fuel economy by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    How many miles per acre do you get?

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    1. Re:Fuel economy by h4x0t · · Score: 1

      Needs another denominator. Miles per acre per year or month?

    2. Re:Fuel economy by treeves · · Score: 1

      Let's see. Do you want to know in m^-1 or 1/feet?

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    3. Re:Fuel economy by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      26 poles! And not a stone less.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re:Fuel economy by ciderbrew · · Score: 1

      I thought poles was the unit for builders per bathroom?

  2. I eats me spinach by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

    Where are all the Popeye jokes?

    1. Re:I eats me spinach by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Where are all the Popeye jokes?

      There's a 15 year statue of limitations on Slashdot jokes. That's why we don't get Popeye jokes but we do +5 flying chair and BSOD jokes.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:I eats me spinach by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Where are all the Popeye jokes?

      There's a 15 year statue of limitations on Slashdot jokes. That's why we don't get Popeye jokes but we do +5 flying chair and BSOD jokes.

      [OT] Haven't seen any references to FSM/noodly-appendages in a while, even the occasions weren't missing.
      Right... it's no longer a matter of jokes, it wouldn't be politically correct.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    3. Re:I eats me spinach by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Huh?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    4. Re:I eats me spinach by treeves · · Score: 1

      Sulfur Potassium Iodine Sodium Methane? That's one bizarre molecule!

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    5. Re:I eats me spinach by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      statue of limitations

      Is that near Ellie's Island?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:I eats me spinach by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Pre-empted by the summary. Nobody wants to post a Popeye joke when it's already been done up top.

    7. Re:I eats me spinach by lxs · · Score: 1

      Aahhh the statue of limitations. Is that one in the Uffizi gallery or the Louvre?

    8. Re:I eats me spinach by sqldr · · Score: 1

      1975

      --
      I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    9. Re:I eats me spinach by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      "15 year statue of limitations on Slashdot jokes."

      As Popeye said while wearing a straw wig on Goon Island: "Hair today, goon tomorrow."

    10. Re:I eats me spinach by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Heh. For the record, that was a typo and not a misspelling!

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    11. Re:I eats me spinach by Golddess · · Score: 1

      FSM is my chosen deity (so I know what the terms refer to) and I still have no clue what c0lo meant.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    12. Re:I eats me spinach by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Nono, not SPINa, Spina. Obviously it's some new element not yet on the chart.

      And even if it were SPINa, that'd be Sulfur Phosphorus Iodine Sodium. :P

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    13. Re:I eats me spinach by treeves · · Score: 1

      Gaaah! What a stupid mistake. Of course real spinach does actually contain good amount of Potassium, K, about the same amount in a half cup as there is in a medium size banana. And, unrelated, a fair amount of vitamin K.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  3. sounds like ethanol all over again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Food based fuels are worthless. Extremely low yield and drives food costs up and deletes food supplies, and you need an acre of land to produce a gallon of usable fuel.

    1. Re:sounds like ethanol all over again by mspohr · · Score: 3, Informative
      I know it's too much to ask you to actually read the article but this method does not convert spinach to fuel. It uses a spinach protein as a catalyst to produce hydrogen. If you recall, catalysts are not consumed, they facilitate reactions. In fact, TFA says that the spinach protein membrane is self healing.

      Popeye was really on to something.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    2. Re:sounds like ethanol all over again by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      If you recall, catalysts are not consumed, they facilitate reactions.

      Just because a catalyst is not consumed in the reaction does not mean that secondary effects from the reaction can't or won't ruin/destroy the catalyst.

      If you're using an organic catalyst, I'd expect it to get broken down somehow as a result of the reaction.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:sounds like ethanol all over again by SylvanCyke · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, "sounds like"'s post is blatant misinformation. Well researched plans on used vegetable oil have been well researched. Essentially used or dead plants can be implemented as a fuel source. The entire negative case is spurious.

    4. Re:sounds like ethanol all over again by pinkushun · · Score: 1

      That won't stop people from trying to discover new alternative fuels, pitied fool.

  4. That's nothing. by bmo · · Score: 1

    I can convert beans into methane in my large intestine.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:That's nothing. by u17 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but what is its efficiency?

    2. Re:That's nothing. by underqualified · · Score: 2

      three trips per can.....to the toilet.

    3. Re:That's nothing. by c0lo · · Score: 1

      Yes, but what is its efficiency?

      Funny coincidence, I was asking myself the same thing in relation with the spinach-catalyst... the TFA doesn't say a word about it.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  5. More info by ThreePhones · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's the more detailed press release. They're using proteins extracted from spinach and they plan to eventually produce them synthetically. The spinach doesn't directly produce the hydrogen.

  6. Stop wasting food by Manfre · · Score: 1

    They really need to stop wasting time and money researching how to reduce the food supply. It makes a lot more sense to look at potential energy sources that do not reduce the amount of arable land.

    1. Re:Stop wasting food by Rylz · · Score: 2

      No need to kill anyone just fewer children due to high costs.

      Too bad that doesn't actually work in practice. It's lower income communities and countries that have the highest birth rates.

      --
      Sometimes you've gotta roll the hard six.
    2. Re:Stop wasting food by Unkyjar · · Score: 1

      Not sure how this research is wasting food.

      Here's the actual press release, and far better written than the article.

      http://www.ornl.gov/info/press_releases/get_press_release.cfm?ReleaseNumber=mr20110203-00

    3. Re:Stop wasting food by seven+of+five · · Score: 1

      They're not talking about food this time.

  7. Hydrogen != Green by pr0f3550r · · Score: 2
    Hydrogen's effects on the upper atmosphere is not yet well known but there are indicators that it is bad, very bad. They only reason sheeple are jumping on the hydrogen band wagon is because:

    Hydrogen Fuel != Fossil Fuel

    Fossil Fuel == Bad

    Therefore (they conclude):

    Hydrogen == Good

    The proponents of Hydrogen Fuel say that the only waste product in the burning of H2 and O2 is H2O but this is NOT true. Because you do not get a 100% efficient burn and because H2 is very leaky stuff even in a fuel cell, the other waste product they fail to mention is the fuel itself. So the question is what happens to H2 and O3 in the upper atmosphere? We were is such a rush to eliminate CFCs (quite heavy molecules in comparison) because of their effects should they reach the ozone. How ironic that so many now turn to H2 as a panacea of clean energy when it can be demonstrated that it affects on ozone and unspent and leaky H2 has no where to go but up. http://eands.caltech.edu/articles/LXVI/H2.html

    1. Re:Hydrogen != Green by Black+Gold+Alchemist · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Please try zinc instead. Zinc-air technology is amazing. It is the most efficient round trip fuel technology I've seen. If we moved all (or even some) hydrogen research dollars to zinc air, it would win. See for example, this bus: zinc air fuel cell bus.

      --
      Responsibility is an addiction
      Virtue is a temptation
      Community is a cartel
    2. Re:Hydrogen != Green by mark-t · · Score: 2

      Hydrogen that leaks out into the atmosphere will readily combine with available oxygen to form water again. And although water vapor can indeed deplete ozone, it is worth noting that the process of extracting hydrogen from water also produces oxygen as well, which will typically be released back into the atmosphere, some of which in turn would form ozone during thunderstorms, keeping the system quite balanced.

    3. Re:Hydrogen != Green by JumperCable · · Score: 1

      Because you do not get a 100% efficient burn and because H2 is very leaky stuff even in a fuel cell, the other waste product they fail to mention is the fuel itself.

      The other waste product is the fuel itself? Isn't the fuel hydrogen too?

    4. Re:Hydrogen != Green by pr0f3550r · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Lightning from thunderstorms produces ozone in the troposphere. Ozone in the troposphere is a pollutant and causes respiratory ailments in animal life. Moreover, it is too volatile to ever hope to make it 'back home' to the stratosphere. Lightning does not build the ozone layer but rather radiation from space. The problem with H2 is that it does NOT combine with O2 unless burned which it cannot do unless it is in concentrations of >4%. It is, however, reactive with ozone and water in the upper atmosphere is a bad thing.

      Part of the reason for the hole in the ozone layer above the poles in the winter and spring is due to the fact that it is, at times, too cold for ozone to form as a stable layer. So a reduction in the temperature of the stratosphere due to water in the upper atmosphere can cause an additional decay. H2 recombining with O3 produces water which lowers the temperature of the upper atmosphere causing further depletion of the ozone. Additionally, oxygen is heavier than nitrogen so the process of 'balancing' the system only serves to deplete the stratosphere of oxygen in all forms.

      Nobody, to my knowledge, has even studied the affects of ground sourced H2 and existing monatomic oxygen in the mesosphere. Lastly, leaking and unspent H2 which doesn't react with ozone doesn't 'build up' in the stratosphere but rather it goes into space leaving the 'balance' you mention unanswered and having the effect of stranding the oxygen on the planet. Remember that Oxygen is a pollutant too and at 35% (we are currently at 21%) we get massive fires from a highly combustable atmosphere and huge spiders and frogs.

      I accept that Hydrogen power is a better alternative for the time being to that burning fossil fuels at an unsustainable rate. But it is so popular to say that hydrogen is green and the answer to all our problems when there is this caveat and very little has been done to properly research the downside.

      PS. I think it would take a long time for us to turn that much water to Oxygen through leaking H2 into space and thereby making massive frogs. Although it might be fun to see!

    5. Re:Hydrogen != Green by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Hydrogen is not and can not be a replacement for fossil fuels, it is simply not a source of energy. It is only a way store energy.

    6. Re:Hydrogen != Green by Peter+Mork · · Score: 1

      Viewed from that perspective, your only real option is nuclear as a source of energy. Everything else just moves energy from one form to another whereas fission and fusion convert mass into energy. (Even solar energy is ultimately nuclear, no?)

    7. Re:Hydrogen != Green by Bucc5062 · · Score: 1

      I read through the web page and I am confused. If this is such a good technology, and it was tested successfully; why was the program/project stopped and set to inactive? Either this is a BS way to get people to link to a site for clicks, or y'all got bad marketing folks. To my eye this project does not need research dollars, it needs VC money to get it in the market place. So which is it, bogus site for clicks and giggles or a legitimate project that is being squashed by "the Man".

      --
      Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
    8. Re:Hydrogen != Green by Black+Gold+Alchemist · · Score: 1

      It's a legit project. video. There are several problems with the idea, and that's why it was stopped.

      1. It's not efficient. Because of inefficiencies in the air electrode and oxygen evolution electrode, the system is only around 54% efficient round trip. Most battery systems are 70-99% efficient.
      2. It requires heavy automation. They had to build a factory to reduce zinc oxide to zinc, and load it in to the cars.
      3. It's expensive, because the air electrodes contain a lot of unobtainium.

      --
      Responsibility is an addiction
      Virtue is a temptation
      Community is a cartel
    9. Re:Hydrogen != Green by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      How about NiZn batteries, or better, NiLi. Fuel cells suck for a number of reasons.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    10. Re:Hydrogen != Green by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      And a very inefficient one, at that. At least in general.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    11. Re:Hydrogen != Green by Black+Gold+Alchemist · · Score: 1

      Yes. Fuel cells have efficiency and durability issues. Zinc-based batteries also have issues due to shape change of the zinc powder and dendritic growth. Believe it or not, alkaline batteries (MnZn) are actually rechargables, but only for two-five cycles.

      --
      Responsibility is an addiction
      Virtue is a temptation
      Community is a cartel
    12. Re:Hydrogen != Green by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      And that is useful how, exactly?

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  8. Re:I thought we were over this? by basotl · · Score: 1

    Well if you RTFA you will come notice that the spinach is not the energy source in this case. It is being used as a catalyst for the hydrogen production.

    --
    HTC EVO 4G LTE w/ CM 10.2 | NookColor w/ CM 10.2 | Samsung Epic 4G w/ CM 10.1
  9. Actual info perhaps? by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 1

    Thank you. TFA is one of the most poorly written pieces of drivel I have read in a long time. It barely makes any sense...

    The researchers used an innovative technique called “small angle neutron scattering” at ORNL’s High Flux Isotope Reactor to produce the hydrogen.

    Umm, so this is some kind of nuclear process to produce hydrogen? WTF!?! This is just the worst example from TFA, the whole thing is crappy. Thanks very much for your link, it actually explains what has happened.

    --
    I don't therefore I'm not.
    1. Re:Actual info perhaps? by goodmanj · · Score: 1

      Here's the actual news summary:

      Scientists glue spinach photosynthesis proteins to a plastic sheet.

      I see no indication, apart from journalists' breathless summaries, that hydrogen is actually being produced. The neutron scattering thing is just the technique used to look at the proteins and their attachment to the plastic.

    2. Re:Actual info perhaps? by treeves · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure where you got the quote you posted, but the article I saw said, "Small angle neutron scattering analysis performed at ORNL's High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) showed that the LHC-II, when introduced into a liquid environment that contained polymers, interacted with polymers to form lamellar sheets similar to those found in natural photosynthetic membranes.

      Not to produce hydrogen, but to show how it could work.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    3. Re:Actual info perhaps? by ThreePhones · · Score: 1

      You're right, they haven't produced hydrogen yet. They make it sound like that step is a piece of cake: "These systems would consist of high surface area, light-collecting panes that use the proteins combined with a catalyst such as platinum to convert the sunlight into hydrogen". I doubt that it's that easy or they would have already done it. Nevertheless, it sounds like a promising area of study, which is of course the whole reason for the press release: Get more money!

    4. Re:Actual info perhaps? by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 1

      Yup. That's the from link I thanked ThreePhones for.

      I got the quote from the link in the summary. Have a read. It's worth it if you enjoy giving yourself a headache...

      I seriously just had to re read it to try and figure out what the hell the author is getting at. I really wonder how anybody found any information in it meaningful enough to submit it to /. in that form. I also wonder how the hell it got past an editor.

      --
      I don't therefore I'm not.
  10. Re:I thought we were over this? by Unkyjar · · Score: 1

    At this point, anything that has hydrogen in it or can turn into hydrogen somehow can be used as fuel these days but for what purpose was this research made for?

    To answer your question, FTFA:

    âoeWeâ(TM)re building on the photosynthesis research to explore the development of self-assembly in biohybrid systems,â Oâ(TM)Neill said. âoeThe neutron studies give us direct evidence that this is occurring.â

  11. bah by Goldsmith · · Score: 2

    The efficiency of photosynthetic proteins is terrible compared to inorganic photocatalysts. The only advantage biological systems have is that the only reasonable room temperature catalyst for photoconversion of carbon dioxide in air is biological. If you only want to make hydrogen, commercial systems already beat the theoretical highest possible efficiency of biology.

  12. Hydrogen == Greener by RighteousRaven · · Score: 1

    The article that you link to doesn't say that hydrogen isn't good or that it isn't green. It simply says that it may not be ideal. IF hydrogen builds up in the atmosphere then there will be some environmental impact, but that is not known. Even if it does build up, there is no analysis of whether that environmental impact is more or less than alternatives.
    Green isn't some philosophical ideal - it's a moving target based on what we can achieve.

  13. Re:Hey! We can turn snot and gold into super premi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The problem with hydrogen is *still* storage, production is easy. A quick run to the store takes several cubic feet of the gaseous stuff.

  14. Other veggie-energy possibilities by lseltzer · · Score: 1

    Beans could be used for methane fuel.

  15. Re:Burning food for fuel is bad juju by postbigbang · · Score: 1

    No one intimates that it will skew food prices. No one's suggesting subsidies. It's research. There is no commodity market for spinach. It doesn't trade on the FOREX, CBoT, etc.

    Instead, there's a protein that might seve as a catalyst. We don't know the efficiency. We don't know the cost cycle. We don't have very good hydrogen-based fuel cells for civilians yet. We don't have any business ecosystems for civilian hydrogen distribution system so far.

    So, if I may ask, how do you make the leap of logic to food prices at this stage?

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  16. This just in... by virgnarus · · Score: 1

    Spinach prices skyrocket. Children worldwide rejoice.

  17. two issues... by RighteousRaven · · Score: 1

    1) pigs and cows don't produce food, they consume it. You don't need innovation to feed the world - just stop eating meat. You'll also be helping the energy crisis, water crisis, and climate crisis at the same time.
    2) THE government? I assume you mean America's government, but even then I'm not sure which one you're referring to... it changes every once in a while you know, as does technology.

  18. Fuel from plant is probably a lost cause by 2Bits · · Score: 2

    I know people are working hard to try to find an alternative to fossil fuel, but I believe using plant as an alternative is probably a lost cause. Whether you try to create methanol from plant (or food) or as the article suggests, use the spinach protein to extract hydrogen from water, is not very efficient way to create fuel. Sure, plants are "renewable", but at what cost? The gain in fuel is not enough to offset the cost, not only the economic cost of producing the fuel, but the environment, societal cost too. You may argue that we simply haven't found an efficient way to do it, that's all, but we eventually will. However, the cost to environment and the ripple that it creates through societies (e.g. rise of food prices) will always be there. Unless, of course, we could harvest plants/food massively, at very low cost, and without effect to the planet. That is a tall order, by itself.

    I believe there are better ways, which we already know now, and which have lower long term cost. Nonetheless, the research project mentioned in TFA is still very cool.

    1. Re:Fuel from plant is probably a lost cause by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I know people are working hard to try to find an alternative to fossil fuel, but I believe using plant as an alternative is probably a lost cause.

      It's called algae. They grow in dirty water or seawater and we have lots of both. HTH.

      Unless, of course, we could harvest plants/food massively, at very low cost, and without effect to the planet. That is a tall order, by itself.

      That's called algae, too. It makes a pretty foul food but fine fuel.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  19. Re:Burning food for fuel is bad juju by dakameleon · · Score: 1

    RTFA - it's about using proteins, which happen to be found in spinach, to catalyse solar power reactions that produce Hydrogen, not burning the damn spinach. Yeesh.

    --
    Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
  20. Soylent Green by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Anyone else read that as *Spanish*?

    I wondered if it was some attempt to improve the country's finances and reduce unemployment at the same time.

    Of course if you wanted to drive anywhere between noon and 4 p.m. you'd be SOL...

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Soylent Green by Unkyjar · · Score: 1

      How on earth will this research increase the price of a veggie?

    2. Re:Soylent Green by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      How on earth will this research increase the price of a veggie?

      In other words, what the hell has that got to do with the price of beans?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  21. what do you mean by Dishwasha · · Score: 1

    IF Popeye had made alternative fuels? ONRL is simply replicating what you get when Popeye takes a dump.

    s/Popeye/Chuck Norris/g

  22. Blood for spinach by cryfreedomlove · · Score: 1

    Are we going to send our finest young men and women to conquer the spinach producing countries now?

  23. Food-based fuels are great for my portfolio by unassimilatible · · Score: 1

    1) Take proceeds from myy sugar and corn ETFs that went up from Ethanol;
    2) Sit back and wait for Spinach ETF;
    3) Profit.

    --
    Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
  24. Re:They should try Korean Kimchi by SylvanCyke · · Score: 1

    The massive advantage to using Kimchi as a fuel source is that only the most badass customer would toy with the idea of eating your fuel.

  25. What next? by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

    Fuel from Olive Oyl?

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
  26. No need to worry by voss · · Score: 1

    The US is the number 2 spinach producing country in the world and the largest exporter. China produces 85% of the worlds spinach so they will probably benefit more from this technology than we will.

  27. Just tried this by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

    My car was nearing empty so I put some spinach in my tank. The tires bulged up a lot and got some sort of battleship design on them. Then my car took off (luckily, I was able to jump inside) and I made my 30 minute morning commute in just 3 minutes. Of course, it was knocking cars off the road right and left. And I'm not sure how a corncob pipe got stuck in my car's grill.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  28. how about driving less? by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

    Why should everyone deal with higher food prices especially healthy foods we shouldn't discourage people from eating? Fuck the lazy and make them drive less and build up superior public transportation. It's not like the whole world has too much food and we'd only be converting waste.

    You simply don't need to drive your big ass SUV down the road to the shop. When the petrol runs out then tough luck. Walk more fatties.

    1. Re:how about driving less? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
      You're kind of all over the place there Toadwarrier. And I mostly agree with you. But the real problem is that if we reduce the amount of fuel or any other resource we use, it doesn't take too long for increasing population to gobble any savings up. Which is to say that if we feed the world, we'll only have more people to feed.

      I don't know what to do about it, because it's a moral dilemma. But if we support the present rate of population growth, conservation is no solution.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    2. Re:how about driving less? by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

      While it may be true that we could lose a few people on this planet but it still more unfair to significantly raise the price of a food which will affect more people and probably sop more people from eating veg and living with poorer health.

      Not everyone wastes petrol and drives unnecessarily but a lot of people do. I believe there is less reason to punish people globally by raising fuel prices instead of limiting people's wasteful driving.