This is a REALLY misleading article. It makes it sound like you can get all the hydrogen you want out of a AAA battery. WRONG!
The advance here is that they invented an affordable catalyst that makes hydrolysis work at low voltage. But you still have to provide as much energy to split the water into hydrogen and oxygen as you get back when you burn it again. And you always have to provide a bit more because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Therefore, there is no net gain of energy here, or no new energy source, just a slightly better way of converting electrical energy into potential energy in the form of hydrogen gas.
....Therefore, there is no net gain of energy here,.....
Wouldn’t that depend upon how you rated the energy use of the hydrogen + oxygen?
Are we talking about BTU’s ?
...and they would be all like "thermodywhat?"
People think that hydrogen is a potential new energy source. It's not. It's only a potential new way of storing and retrieving energy for use. And if it becomes an efficient method of storing energy, then it may become a good alternative for powering cars.
I can imagine, for example, if the technology were created to efficiently and continuously produce sufficient hydrogen in the home from the domestic water supply, gas stations might become obsolete. You could just store the hydrogen in tanks in your home, hook up your car to refuel, and go on your merry way.
If that technology existed, I would almost certainly get a fuel cell car.
It might also provide an economically effective way to get electricity to remote places, especially those that have abundant sunlight, which could be used to split water into hydrogen and oxygen.
Just remember that the second law of thermodynamics has not been repealed, although Obama may just try to do just that, too, without Congress.
Ah, but the kicker here is it may make solar or wind generated electricity useful for something.