Posted on 11/17/2007 12:44:57 AM PST by neverdem
If the hoped-for hydrogen economy is ever to become a reality, researchers must devise efficient ways to produce and store the gas. That will require a series of breakthroughs that have been slow in coming. But researchers in the United States have hit upon a material for storing hydrogen that could be far better than the competition--just the sort of break hydrogen researchers are looking for.
Hydrogen has long been seen as a potentially green alternative to gasoline, which is produced from fossil fuels and gives off the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide when burned. When piped through a fuel cell, hydrogen molecules (H2) combine with oxygen, producing only electricity and water. At room temperature, however, hydrogen is a gas, which makes it difficult to store enough of it on board a car to drive long distances. The gas can be compressed in high-pressure tanks or cooled to a liquid at ultracold temperatures. But both of those strategies require large amounts of energy themselves.
As an alternative, researchers have been searching for materials that can hold large amounts of H2 and release it on demand. But so far the best performers, which are known as metal hydrides, hold only about 2% of their weight in hydrogen at room temperature, well below what is needed for a practical gas tank. Other materials can get up to 7% but require either high or low temperatures, and thus added energy and cost.
Last year, however, researchers led by Taner Yildirim at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Gaithersburg, Maryland, calculated that a material made from certain metals, such as titanium, and a small hydrocarbon called ethylene should form a stable complex that could bind up to 14% of its weight in hydrogen. Adam Phillips, a physicist and postdoc in the lab of Bellave Shivaram at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, decided to give the proposal a try.
Phillips used a laser to vaporize titanium in a gas of ethylene. The combined material settled out of the gas and on to a substrate to form a film. When Phillips added hydrogen at room temperature and weighed the result, he found the 14% added weight, just as predicted. After running a series of successful control studies, Phillips and Shivaram reported their new material on Monday at the International Symposium on Materials Issues in a Hydrogen Economy in Richmond, Virginia.
The new result is "extremely interesting," says Gholam-Abbas Nazri, a hydrogen storage expert at the General Motors Research and Development Center in Warren, Michigan. However, Nazri adds, "we have to be very cautious." There have been numerous false starts in the field before, he says. And researchers still must make the material in bulk, demonstrate that it works in that form, and show that it will release hydrogen as easily as it sops it up.
Even with those caveats, George Crabtree, a physicist at Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois, says the result "is one of the most promising developments of the last few years."
Related site
No, because part of that equation would be nuclear, coal to liquids, and clean coal, something the leftists wouldn’t like but would help solve our energy dependence, along with biofuels and other forms or renewable energy.
“No, because part of that equation would be nuclear, coal to liquids, and clean coal, something the leftists wouldn’t like but would help solve our energy dependence, along with biofuels and other forms or renewable energy.”
Coal —> Liquids = Carbon Dioxide (not a poison)
Clean Coal = Carbon Dioxide (not a poison, has nothing to do with energy independence)
Biofuels = expensive (not going to happen)
That sounds suspiciously racist! ;)
Nuclear...that’s the solution. What form the atomic energy is transformed into for use in a car is a different question.
You can convert it to hydrogen
You can convert it to ethanol(with the help of corn)
Or you can just use the electricity directly in a battery powered vehicle.
But whatever you do, it all comes back to more atomic energy, in my opinion.
heats up with expansion rather than cooling with expansion
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think that’s impossible. If it were true then compressing H2 gas into a liquid would absorb heat rather than give off heat. And that just is not possible.
“Black ice = evil
That sounds suspiciously racist! ;)”
I drove truck for 9 years, 2 years with a LTL company based in Denver, CO. UP and OVER, UP and OVER, UP and OVER wolf creek pass sometimes twice a day.
Black Ice is absolute evil.
Heavier grades of fuel oil, asphalt, and tar have a higher BTU/lb rating than does diesel, kerosene, and jet fuel...I think. I’d have to look it up to be 100% certain. But as I remember...as volatility rised, energy content declines.
“Nuclear...that’s the solution. What form the atomic energy is transformed into for use in a car is a different question.
You can convert it to hydrogen
You can convert it to ethanol(with the help of corn)
Or you can just use the electricity directly in a battery powered vehicle.
But whatever you do, it all comes back to more atomic energy, in my opinion.”
***************
As long as there is a big excise tax on OIL, an ADDITIONAL OVER DEMAND massive electrical power generation (nuclear most probable) to insert into the alternative production, then it is possible to become energy independant.
If you want to manipulate the free market, corporate welfare is exactly the opposite direction to go. If you want to artificially manipulate the free market, only a big excise tax on OIL will work.
All other alternative plan will fail.
I completely agree. Nuclear is the way to go.
Try doing a little research on the subject before you make an assertion like that. Intuition is a poor substitute for knowledge.
Ha!
You are seriously trying to tell me that liquid H2 is a higher energy state than gas? I don’t think I need to research that statement. I suppose if I apply heat to hydrogen gas long enough, it will freeze solid, right? Thanks for the chuckle.
Biofeuls should be considered for nothing other than oxygenates. For that they do great.
We should be going to fuel cells and batteries anyway. Much more efficient.
“Biofeuls should be considered for nothing other than oxygenates. For that they do great.
We should be going to fuel cells and batteries anyway. Much more efficient.”
****************
How about letting the free market decide.
That's my company's can't-be-hidden agenda!
Well, one thing about it, with oil prices this high it sure makes alot of alternative energy technologies viable.
AS I said go look it up. Careful, your stupidity is showing.
Ok, I’ll let you lead on this one. Give me a link that proves your superiority.
“Well, one thing about it, with oil prices this high it sure makes alot of alternative energy technologies viable.”
*******************
The prospect of oil dropping low again, will keep the smart investors away from throwing capital into alternatives. This is why THE ONLY SOLUTION would be a continuously adjusting excise tax on gasoline and diesel.
And that tax can’t be no wussy tax, i’m talking $5 - $15 per gallon.
So enough all of this tough talk on alternatives, we all know its not going to happen.
Not my job. Look it up, you’ve got a computer. If you want a clue, start by doing a search on the Joule-Thompson effect.
By the way, I apologize for the “stupidity” remark. The properties of hydrogen and helium run counter to what we have been led to believe by our general science classes, so lack of informed opinion would have been a better choice of words. I spent 25 years in chemistry of hydrocarbons and dealt with Hydrogen on a daily basis. No need for me to get snippy.
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.