A New Dawn for Solar Energy

[hammersley]

MIT scientists inspired by photosynthesis have developed a process that might finally make solar energy affordable and easy to produce



A New Dawn for Solar Energy | Popular Science



It doesn’t take a stellar imagination to figure out the main downside of solar power. For years, the question of how to store the energy generated when the sun is shining for use at night has prevented solar power from becoming a viable alternative energy source. However, a new breakthrough may have overcome that storage problem, opening the door for solar energy on a grand scale.



Drawing on the principles of photosynthesis, the team at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology designed a system that uses solar power to break water into hydrogen and oxygen, which can be stored for later use as fuel. The process, detailed in the July 31st issue of the journal Science, hinges on the addition of new catalysts. The new technique takes advantage of a cobalt catalyst’s ability to create oxygen gas when combined with water and an electric current. The solar panels provide the electric current, and the energy from that current is stored in the form of the hydrogen and oxygen, rather than in a capacitor.



Storing the solar energy as disassociated hydrogen and oxygen is far easier and cheaper than storing the solar power as electrical energy in a capacity. With the difficulty and expense of energy storage forming a major hurdle in the way of providing affordable solar power, this new technique may be the first step towards fulfilling significant energy demands with solar power. And considering the high price and limited available of fossils fuels, along with the fact that 174 thousand trillion watts of sunlight hit the Earth every day, a breakthrough in solar energy couldn’t come at a better time. Of course, cars still cant’ use the hydrogen fuel generated by this process, but at least it’s a step in the right direction.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Sure is amazing (puzzling, actually!) that the SAME efficient use of Hydrogen as an energy source for a HOME, is deemed so UNusable for a vehicle... .

 

[DHayden]

I saw on "BEYOND TOMARROW" a few years ago where someone had figured out how to make the solar cells pick up the "invisible" energy which is lost at night which was supposedly a HUGE leap forward. They said it could be put in paints to be sprayed on your house, vehichle or even made into clothes to power ipods and cell phones. That was 2 years ago and not a peep since... .

 

[Little Bill]

Gary,

Here's a bit of insight on the hurdles of a hydrogen economy.

http://www.efcf.com/reports/E05.pdf

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Gary,



Here's a bit of insight on the hurdles of a hydrogen economy.



http://www.efcf.com/reports/E05.pdf

Interesting article - but one that is dealing primarily with the generation, compressing, and transport of Hrdrogen an a large commercial/industrial scale - NOT generation and use all at the same site - or in a rolling platform, such as a vehicle...

 

[Little Bill]

Gary,



You completely miss the point. It takes more electrical energy to electrolyze water to H2 and O2 than you can recover from burning those gases together. Solar arrays, wind turbines or wave action electrical generators are necessary to make H2 generation cost effective. Once you get past the initial capital, the power is cheap enough that you can begin to ignore the conversion inefficiencies and parasitic losses.



On site generation exists. There are many legitimate, high quality, safe units operating everywhere. These are for on-demand generation of high purity H2 and/or O2 for analytical equipment, etc where the cost is insignificant vs the need for high purity gas without safety related storage issues.



Units on 'rolling platforms' also exist. Nasa use them for O2 generation aboard spacecraft. The Space Station uses them. The Russian Soyez {sp} programs uses them. They are all solar powered. They are also on submarines for the same purpose. These are nuclear powered.



As far as powering one off your truck alternator, forget about it. It requires more energy to drive the alternator than you can get back from burning the hydrogen. If your serious, you need to build a solar array in the bed of your truck.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

As far as powering one off your truck alternator, forget about it. It requires more energy to drive the alternator than you can get back from burning the hydrogen. If your serious, you need to build a solar array in the bed of your truck.

It's real easy to quote or point to text book declarations on diverse, complicated and involved issues - but here's a question for all the "Hydrogen Einsteins" out there:



1. How much HP is required to push one of our trucks one mile down a level road at 60 MPH?



2. How many amperes (watts) at 12 volts is required to do the same thing?



3. IF we want to use the amps/watts from a diesel engine/alternator to do the same thing, what HP engine would it take to drive it? At what MPG?



4. What drop in HP and MPG at 60 MPH, would a 20 amp alternator draw/load (the typical ampreage used in these HHO setups) create in trucks like ours?



Toss that Hydrogen textbook aside - the one that refers to and applies to a broad scale of Hydrogen generation and use - and apply it totally and specifically to OUR use, in OUR trucks, with the devices actually being used and discussed here - and let's see those answers to the above!



If you CAN'T answer those questions, think before you say what's being attempted is "scientifically impossible" - and remember, such a device that can even gain 2 MPG, is a significant achievement at the current price per gallon of diesel fuel!



Random, critical individuals - and scientists - would CONTINUE to deny the possibility of a practical or efficient hydrogen powered vehicle, even if one ran over them on the street! :-laf:-laf



How long ago has it been that "scientific experts" quoted "Laws of science" that stated that the sound barrier could not be exceeded? That the atom could not be split without destroying our world and the universe? Many things are "impossible" only on paper and in the mind - until some dummy who doesn't know any better, actually finds a way, and DOES the impossible!



Sorry for the hijack - but anything related to HHO power technology seriously intersects with the same technology as being researched and developed in vehicle alternative power/fuel.

 

[Little Bill]

Gary,



Before I answer your questions, please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Bill Meadowcroft. I am a Sr. Technology Consultant with E. I. DuPont & Co. For the past 33 years I have been immersed our (DuPont) Nafion product line. Nafion is a chemically inert ion exchange membrane used as a separator in electrolytic processes. This includes membranes specifically for water electrolysis, brine electrolysis for chlorine and caustic production, hydrogen and methanol fuel cells, electroplating and electro-winning, metals recover and remediation, to name a few. We have around 1,000,000 square meters of membrane operating globally at this moment. My job is quite multifunctional. I design membranes for all of the above applications except fuel cells. We have another strategic business unit that handles that. I work in the field with electrolyzer designers to optimize the synergies between the electrolyzer hardware and the membranes. I work in the field with end users to help them identify and correct issues that are affecting their unit performance. I circle the globe 2-3 times a year to address these technical questions and issues face to face, hands on. This nuisance keeps me abroad for 4-5 months a year and I have to depend on my family to maintain my feeder cattle business in my absence. And I am constantly scouting for new applications where we can apply our technology. Believe this, I have investigated this topic many, many times from many, many perspectives. I truly wish it could work, and so does my management. If I could stick a little piece of Nafion into every car in the world we could make Exxon's profits look like pennies, but alas, I am morally and ethically bound to produce products and services which benefit mankind and contribute to a greener globe.



Having said that, I don't know if that makes me a "random, critical individual", a "scientific expert quoting laws of science", or a somewhat knowledgeable person in your eyes. I have my hands and mind on this stuff every day ... for 33 years ... that's 12,000 days of my life devoted to actual electrochemical applications that are running and producing cost effective products today.



To answer your questions,



1. How much HP is required to push one of our trucks one mile down a level road at 60 MPH?

Passenger cars require about 20 HP to maintain speed at 60 MPH with air conditioning off and all electical accessories off. I can not find a study for our trucks, but as we are double the weight and less aerodynamic I will throw 30 HP on the table.



2. How many amperes (watts) at 12 volts is required to do the same thing?

22. 371 kilowatt-hours



3. IF we want to use the amps/watts from the alternator to do the same thing, what extra load would it place upon the engine to drive it? At what loss of MPG?

Ignoring parasitic losses and conversion losses, 30 HP. I can't address HP loss without knowing how you want to apply this energy. Electric motor(s) or hydrogen generation?



4. What drop in MPG at 60 MPH, would a 20 amp alternator draw/load create?

Alternators require 1 HP for every 30 amps they produce. There is a lot of energy loss there. A 20 amp load = . 666 HP = 1696 BTU. 20 amps-hours applied against a single mason jar electrolyzer for 1 hour will produce 0. 75 moles of H2 = 16. 7 liters of H2 = 187 BTU. This would be about a 3% loss in MPG.



FYI, you need 26. 8 amp-hours to produce 1 chemical equivalence. This is based on Faraday's constant, a silly old chemistry law that has been around for the past 150 years and proves itself correct every day ... every day in real world, real electrochemical applications.



You may have thought I was kidding when I suggested to put a solar array in your truck bed. I was dead serious. After you get over the cost of purchase, that energy is free and perfect for H2 generation. Who cares if it's only 30% efficient. If those photons weren't making electricity, they'd only be sunburning you and fading the paint on your truck.



Regarding your comment "deny the impossibility of a practical or efficient hydrogen powered vehicle, even if one ran over them on the street", there are ICE (internal combustion engines) applications scattered about. They run well on hydrogen. A plant I service in Norway has set up an automotive hydrogen fueling station. They currently have 3 cars in the locality that have converted from gasoline to H2 that purchase their H2. I expect to hear they have more customers next time I go there. Conversion from hydrocarbon to hydrogen is similar to LPG or NLG but miles per fill-up is less do to the nature of H2 compression. You have to keep it really cold to maintain it in a liquid state whereas propane and natural gas don't have the same requirements. So for H2, gaseous compression or metal hydride storage is the only reasonable option for a 'gas tank'.



So, hydrogen powered vehicles do exist and they operate well. Conversion of 'on board' hydrocarbons to electricity to electrolytically produced H2 is still plagued with those same damn facts that keep me from being a billionaire.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

Thanks for the reply - a followup comment and question:

A 20 amp load = . 666 HP = 1696 BTU. 20 amps-hours applied against a single mason jar electrolyzer for 1 hour will produce 0. 37 moles of H2 = 8. 3 liters of H2 = 187 BTU.

Why are you using that equation on a SINGLE jar, when most setups are using multiple containers at the same amperage - are you saying that the amperage vs gas output is the same, regardless of the number of "cells" - that a single jar at 20 amps will generate as much gas as 16 cells at the same amps?



(EDIT)



To take this a step farther - if a typical setup claiming beneficial operation draws a rated 20 amps - and THAT in turn only takes roughly . 6 HP to generate in a typical alternator - it seems hard to believe that these HHO setups are NOT capable of supplying that much fuel power, and then some.



Related, if a vehicle like ours only requires about 30 HP to maintain 60 MPH - how much would MPH and MPG fall with a . 6 HP reduction (parasitic drag) at that same road speed?

 

[Little Bill]

The sum of the oxidation reduction potential required to produce H2 and O2 on platinum electrodes is 1. 23 volts. Another 0. 47 volts is required to overcome the binding energy of water, so a total 1. 7 volts is required to polarize the system. This voltage increases linearly as current density increases. The slope of the increase is dependent upon many factors. Electrode material, electrode gap, electrode area and electrolyte conductivity contribute heavily here. If you had a perfect cell that allowed you to pass 26. 8 amps at around 1. 72 volts then you could put 7 cells in series and get back 1309 BTU, still 387 BTU short of what you put in.

It's hard to address what the operating voltage of the mason jar variety will be. Based on what I see in the pictures and descriptions I would estimate 3-4 volts. Electrode areas are small, electrolyte is weak, electrode material is whatever is lying around the garage. So at 12 volts you can only stack 3-4 of these things together. Once you hit 12 volts (or whatever the regulated voltage of your alternator is) then your load (amperage through the cells) will begin to drop off. I did note that one of the kits being discussed in another thread had 5 cells in series but it was self limited to 11 amps hot and something like 3 amps cold.

You just can't get around that first law of thermodynamics. Whatever happened to the cold fusion guys ?

 

[DHayden]

Spray-On Solar-Power Cells Are True Breakthrough