Hydrogen future

[boutons_deux]

Processing fresh water to produce hydrogen is like processing corn to produce ethanol, only multiplied by 10K of stupidity. You don't sacrifice necessary conditions (increasingly scarce resources necessary for life) and use them to create sufficient conditions for commerce. The only sensible source for hydrogen is the ocean.

Using ground/surface water to produce hydrogen fuel ( to produce water! ) is 1 billionth the stupidity of fracking/uranium/metal ers poisoning billions of gallons of fresh water which contaminates billions of gallons of fresh water, esp in the parched West.

[admiralsnackbar]

Using ground/surface water to produce hydrogen fuel ( to produce water! ) is 1 billionth the stupidity of fracking/uranium/metal ers poisoning billions of gallons of fresh water which contaminates billions of gallons of fresh water, esp in the parched West.

Stupid doesn't trump stupid, its just more stupid for the pile.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Processing fresh water to produce hydrogen is like processing corn to produce ethanol, only multiplied by 10K of stupidity. You don't sacrifice necessary conditions (increasingly scarce resources necessary for life) and use them to create sufficient conditions for commerce. The only sensible source for hydrogen is the ocean.

Yup but there is a ton of usable water in the ocean and other sources. Hydrogen is much, much lighter then the other elements that electrolysis pulls and amongst other things hydrogen oxidation produces fresh water. In that it is not like producing ethanol where the by product after consumption is not corn.

[boutons_deux]

Stupid doesn't trump stupid, its just more stupid for the pile.

a little stupid certainly trumps super mega stupid.

And wouldn't seawater have to be purified by heavy filtering then reverse osmosis?

[Wild Cobra]

New Way to Split Water Molecules Into Hydrogen and Oxygen: Breakthrough for Solar Energy Conversion and Storage?

Using the power of the sun and ultrathin films of iron oxide (commonly known as rust), Technion-Israel Ins ute of Technology researchers have found a novel way to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. The breakthrough, published this week in Nature Materials, could lead to less expensive, more efficient ways to store solar energy in the form of hydrogen-based fuels. This could be a major step forward in the development of viable replacements for fossil fuels.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1112095943.htm

Another wait and see time, to see if this so-called break-thru pans out.

[admiralsnackbar]

In that it is not like producing ethanol where the by product after consumption is not corn.

A very good point.

[admiralsnackbar]

a little stupid certainly trumps super mega stupid.

And wouldn't seawater have to be purified by heavy filtering then reverse osmosis?

Can't argue with you, TBH. Now that the coffe's worn off, it's pretty clear my last few responses were under-cooked and needlessly brusque.

As to your second point... I honestly wouldn't know.

[Nbadan]

All this is obsolete if this pans out...

Lockheed's Skunk Works promises fusion power in four years
Evan Ackerman
Friday, February 22, 2013 - 3:22pm

Until someone figures out a way to manufacture antimatter, fusion is by far the cleanest and most abundant source of power we can hope to harvest. We've known this for a long time, but fusion is hard, and it's expensive to build the giant lasers or toroidal plasma containment systems that are needed to get it to work. By most estimates, we're something like 40 years away from an operational fusion power plant.

"Most estimates" do not, apparently, include research being done at Lockheed Martin's secretive advanced development center, Skunk Works. At Google's Solve For X, Charles Chase describes what his team has been working on: a trailer-sized fusion power plant that turns cheap and plentiful hydrogen (deuterium and tritium) into helium plus enough energy to power a small city. It's safe, it's clean, and Lockheed is promising an operational unit by 2017 with assembly line production to follow, enabling everything from unlimited fresh water to engines that take spacecraft to Mars in one month instead of six.

Lockheed's fusion power plant uses radio energy to heat deuterium gas inside tightly controlled magnetic fields, creating a very high temperature plasma that's much more stable and well confined than you'd find in something like a tokamak.

Chase didn't give a whole lot more technical detail, but he seemed confident in predicting a 100mW prototype by 2017, with commercial 100mW systems available by 2022, implying that all global energy demands will be able to be met by fusion power by about 2045. No more oil, no more coal, no more nuclear, and not even any solar or wind or hydro will be necessary (unless you're into that sort of thing): fusion has the potential to produce as much affordable clean power as we'll ever need, for the entire world. That's wild, and we may see it happen in less than a decade. That is, if Lockheed Martin's plans come to fruition, which we certainly hope they do.

http://www.dvice.com/2013-2-22/lockh...wer-four-years

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The problem with electrolysis of seawater in the past was chlorine gas and other fun gas byproducts due to the salts. What you want is O2 at the anodes but most of the technology up until about 40 years ago was centered around production of chlorine. They now have anodes that generate O2. I think that was developed in the 1980s. The main issue is corrosion for obvious reasons.

[Wild Cobra]

The problem with electrolysis of seawater in the past was chlorine gas and other fun gas byproducts due to the salts. What you want is O2 at the anodes but most of the technology up until about 40 years ago was centered around production of chlorine. They now have anodes that generate O2. I think that was developed in the 1980s. The main issue is corrosion for obvious reasons.

And cost.

44 KWH per gallon of gasoline equivalent.

[admiralsnackbar]

Does anybody know the going life-cycle for top-shelf solar cells these days? The last time I looked into it (jesus... a long long time ago now), they were incapable of generating energy equivalent to what went into their manufacture. I guess I'm asking whether they live long enough to "pay for themselves," or are still subject to the law of entropy for all practical concerns.

[Wild Cobra]

Does anybody know the going life-cycle for top-shelf solar cells these days? The last time I looked into it (jesus... a long long time ago now), they were incapable of generating energy equivalent to what went into their manufacture. I guess I'm asking whether they live long enough to "pay for themselves," or are still subject to the law of entropy for all practical concerns.

My understanding is that solar cells have already historically lasted far longer than projected. If you have sunny skies and enough year round sun, they are probably very practical as an investment.

Ask CC. He's done research in this area.