Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nanotubes Crank Out Hydrogen
Technology Research News/Fuel Cell Today ^ | 27 January 2005

Posted on 01/31/2005 11:44:25 AM PST by anymouse

Pure hydrogen fuel is non-polluting. Current methods of extracting hydrogen, however, use energy derived from sources that pollute. Finding ways to use the sun's energy to split water to extract hydrogen would make for a truly clean energy source.

Several research efforts are using materials engineered at the molecular scale to tap the sun as an energy source to extract hydrogen from water.

Researchers from Pennsylvania State University have constructed a material made from titanium dioxide nanotubes that is 97 percent efficient at harvesting the ultraviolet portion of the sun's light and 6.8 percent efficient at extracting hydrogen from water.

The material is easy to make, inexpensive, and photochemically stable, according to the researchers. The 97 percent efficiency is the highest reported, according to the researchers. There is one catch -- only five percent of the sun's energy is ultraviolet light.

The researchers are working to find a way to shift the response of the nanotube arrays into the visible spectrum.

The key to making titanium dioxide nanotubes that efficiently harvest the energy from light is controlling the thickness of the nanotube walls, according to the researchers. Nanotubes 224 nanometers long with 34-nanometer-thick walls are three times more efficient than those that are 120 nanometers long with 9-nanometer-thick walls.

The researchers made the titanium dioxide nanotube material by mixing titanium with acid and electrifying the mixture, which caused the tiny tubes to grow, then heating them to cause the material to crystallize.

The material could be ready for practical use in two to five years, according to the researchers. The work appeared in the January 12, 2005 issue of Nano Letters.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events; Technical; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: buckyballs; catalysis; elonmusk; energy; falcon9; falconheavy; hydrogen; nanotech; nanotechnology; nanotubes; pennstate; pennsylvania; research; science; solarenergy; spacex; sun; titaniumdioxide; universtity; water
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last
To: Lekker 1
I'd bet that your average 1000 MW coal or nuclear station has a bigger footprint than 1 square km.

Here are some numbers on land use for different energy sources, based on a 1000 MWe design:

nuclear: 1-10 km2
solar: 20-50 km2
wind: 50-150 km2
biomass: 4000-6000 km2

Obviously, some of those are extrapolated based on scale-up of smaller systems, since we don't have any 1000 MWe solar or biomass power plants out there.

But those darned "sun angle", "nighttime", and "cloudy day" issues...those are tough indeed to overcome.

Not to mention the one that I always bring up to the sun worshippers that I have yet to hear a satisfactory answer for, that pesky old natural phenomenon called night.

21 posted on 01/31/2005 1:25:35 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Squawk 8888

... or tilt it slightly, if you can afford the increased slant path through the air. I didn't mention clouds either.


22 posted on 01/31/2005 1:30:28 PM PST by coloradan (Hence, etc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: chimera
But those darned "sun angle", "nighttime", and "cloudy day" issues...those are tough indeed to overcome.

Not to mention the one that I always bring up to the sun worshippers that I have yet to hear a satisfactory answer for, that pesky old natural phenomenon called night.

It was mentioned...

23 posted on 01/31/2005 1:32:40 PM PST by coloradan (Hence, etc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: coloradan
Yep. I problem with reading comprehension. Skipped over that one. Kudos to poster Lekker 1 and yourself for catching my goof...

Not much you can do if your primary energy source goes away for 50% of the time. Those nanotubes get their rest then, I suppose.

24 posted on 01/31/2005 1:42:19 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: coloradan

How about six times the solar capacity, combined with ten times the storage (battery) capacity, plus a backup soure for the third cloudy day?


25 posted on 01/31/2005 4:49:07 PM PST by MainFrame65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: anymouse

You'd get more ultravilot if you widened the ozone hole.


26 posted on 01/31/2005 4:50:23 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Dan Tucker
What kind of emissions is produced by hydrogen fuel?

H2O Water. That's all. Seems like a perfect solution doesn't it?

27 posted on 01/31/2005 8:32:08 PM PST by Only1choice____Freedom ("Do not pray for tasks equal to your powers; pray for powers equal to your tasks,"-President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: anymouse

BTTT


28 posted on 01/31/2005 8:32:51 PM PST by Fiddlstix (This Tagline for sale. (Presented by TagLines R US))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962
You are forgetting about the efficiency loss at each step. After all the conversions you are probably at a whopping 3% efficiency

Even with only 3%, that's a lot of energy. Coal could be the staple again. The benefit comes in with the fact that you can use any kind of kinetic energy to turn a turbine and produce electricity. You would only need to centralize the emissions control at one location. There are other problems than efficiency that stand in the way at this time but the world's finest engineers(The Americans) are working on it. If their track record remains, they will find a way.

29 posted on 01/31/2005 8:38:18 PM PST by Only1choice____Freedom ("Do not pray for tasks equal to your powers; pray for powers equal to your tasks,"-President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage
Even when compressed a thousand times atmospheric pressure, hydrogen occupies 5 times the volume of gasoline. Where do you propose storing it in a vehicle?

They will have to make the system more efficient. Not all problems are solved but the major problem we have now, fossil fuels controlled by unstable nuts causing dangerous emissions, would be solved. The problems it creates may take a while to be economically feasible. But they are worth looking into.

30 posted on 01/31/2005 8:43:11 PM PST by Only1choice____Freedom ("Do not pray for tasks equal to your powers; pray for powers equal to your tasks,"-President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Only1choice____Freedom
Even with only 3%, that's a lot of energy.

The only conversion that really matters is the H2 Chemical energy to kinetic motion conversion. That's the problem to solve. All the rest would be large enough tomake it work. What's the efficiency rate for a coal fired electrical plant?

31 posted on 01/31/2005 8:48:42 PM PST by Only1choice____Freedom ("Do not pray for tasks equal to your powers; pray for powers equal to your tasks,"-President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Squawk 8888
I still think hydrogen is a non-starter. No matter how efficient you get at producing it, the low energy density and near-impossibily of storing it for any significant length of time (it seeps through damn near everything) makes it no match for other fuels.

I second that.

32 posted on 01/31/2005 8:51:25 PM PST by Boiler Plate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator

To: mr. mojo risin

Just noting that the terrorists go to great lengths to turn a vehicle into a car bomb.

Just think the power they would have from readily made car bombs manufactured for them carrying 10,000 lb PSI hydrogen tanks in them. Really good boom.


34 posted on 01/31/2005 9:08:47 PM PST by JustDoItAlways
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Lekker 1

Kilometers? We don't need no stinkin' kilometers!


35 posted on 01/31/2005 9:13:17 PM PST by meatloaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Only1choice____Freedom
H2O Water. That's all. Seems like a perfect solution doesn't it?

That's what I thought. I misunderstood what you wrote. I thought you were saying something else.

36 posted on 01/31/2005 11:00:41 PM PST by Ol' Dan Tucker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: JustDoItAlways

Ok, a couple of things here.First, why not store the hydrogen as a Hydride? that way, you do not have to deal with a huge, ultra-high pressure tank. If a high-density storage hydride can be developed, that could be the answer, couldn't it?

Second, the fuel-cell cars would be the best users of this technology, as the storage problem is currently the only major hurdle preventing elecric-powered cars, from reaching the mass market.

And, instead of using pure hydrogen, why not methanol, or something, similar, to use in a fuel cell, that does not need a reformer? you will still get the benefits of clean-emissions-free operation, and the ease of a"quick, easy fill up", at the "gas" station, that everyone is already used to now.


37 posted on 01/31/2005 11:08:44 PM PST by Rca2000 (Helping to swing the swing state of Ohio to "W")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Only1choice____Freedom
What's the efficiency rate for a coal fired electrical plant?

Thermodynamic efficiency is about 40% for large central stations. But that is just at the point of conversion, i.e., at the plant itself. It doesn't include the whole cycle, such as mining and transport of fuel, construction of the station, waste disposal, etc.

Any kind of practical process is going to have losses. A key consideration is converting something that was not in "useful" form into a kind of energy that can be used effectively. Crude oil underground contains energy. You use a lot of energy getting it out and refining it into gasoline, but once you do that you have a source of energy that is quite useful in that it has high energy content, is readily transportable, and has an important end use. Likewise there is a lot of energy locked up in uranium nuclei that can be exploited in a relatively straightforward manner to produce an energy form that is transportable and probably has the widest range of uses of any energy source we currently have. Sure, you had to expend energy to get it into that form, but now you have it to use whereas before when it was bound up in the nucleus, you didn't.

But that is just one part of the picture. There are others, I know, so we should not be too narrowly focused on the efficiency aspects. Certainly those play an important role, especially on the economics side of the equation, but other issues, like availability, projected lifetime of the resource, environmental effects, etc., may have significant bearing.

38 posted on 02/01/2005 5:55:04 AM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Only1choice____Freedom
H2O Water. That's all. Seems like a perfect solution doesn't it?

I can guarantee that if hydrogen fuel catches on, the watermelons will start condemning it because water vapour is an alleged "greenhouse gas". That's what they started saying about carbon dioxide when gas-fired plants got cleaner.

39 posted on 02/01/2005 6:06:14 AM PST by Squawk 8888 (With enemies like Michael Moore, who needs friends?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Rca2000

Metal hydrides have been touted as a storage solution for at least 25 years- they release the hydrogen when heated. So far, the best they've been able to do has still not matched the efficiency of rechargeable batteries.


40 posted on 02/01/2005 6:10:20 AM PST by Squawk 8888 (With enemies like Michael Moore, who needs friends?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson