As a chemical engineer I have some doubts. Catalysts are usually used for promoting chemical reaction, not to break up a molecule. H-O has a strong bond and it takes a certain amount of energy to break up, I don't think catalyst can reduce the energy needed, hope I'm wrong.

A lot of more detail about the claims of this Solar Power Breakthrough can be found here:

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4378

fakedemocracy August 6th, 2008 12:21 am

"wolf123 is a Big Energy troll. Suddenly concerned about the environmental devastation that clean renewable solar power installed on rooftops will cause."

You are out of your mind, I look at reality not fantasy, Yes, you can install a solar panl on the roof of a house and power it, kind of see (estebandido August 5th, 2008 10:15 pm). Do you have any idea how much electricity a server farm (like the one YOU are now hooked into) take to operate?

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1017-257567.html?legacy=cnet

U.S. Dataport, a company in San Jose, Calif., that planned a $1.2 billion server farm that would be the world's largest data center. It called for 10 huge air-conditioned warehouses on 174 acres that would constantly draw 180 megawatts of electricity--about enough to provide energy for all the homes in a city the size of Honolulu. The San Jose city council approved the center in early May, and it is expected to open in the second quarter of 2002.

(This is no longer the largest it's just large)

http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1374175/server_farms_becoming_a_cash_crop_in_the_midwest/index...

Server farms can grow huge, consuming up to 100 megawatts of electricity, enough to power more than 20,000 American homes.
With perhaps 100,000 pizza -box-sized machines, the buildings are filled with the constant sound of fans blowing over the processors.
Cooling costs _ yet more energy consumption _ can rival the electricity demand to run the computers.
In that way, even your Google search has a carbon footprint. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that server farms consume at least 1.5 percent of all U.S. energy.

180 megawatts, 100 megawatts, HAVE you done the math to see how many solar panels that capture 10-20% of the energy that hits it will you need and how much land area will it take up, and this is JUST for these 2 places, add in all the rest of the in house server farms in small, medium and large business.

I deal in reality not fantasy, the electrical grid sucks, coal fired plants suck, nuclear plants suck, your pip-squeak solar panels that capture 10-20% of the energy that hits it suck. Unless YOU want to live like estebandido (I applaud him for having the fortitude to live like he does in this commercial world) get real.

When you come up with something that gives you the bang for the buck that oil, nuclear, hydro and coal give you and you can install it today not 20 years from today then talk to me. So go back to your workshop and tinker, someday someone will come up with something that will replace all of the above and your fantasy land of today will become reality.

I used to experiment with electrolysis in high school. One thing I noticed was that the copper electrodes would corrode and become insulated after a few minutes, and I remember thinking that wouldn't happen if I had platinum electrodes. Of course, school chemistry labs, even in the rocket-powered 60's, didn't have any platinum lying around.

And fuel cells powered by hydrogen are already being laughed off the California energy policy table. As far as I can see, this is a really roundabout and cumbersome way to do what a lead-acid, NiMH, or other secondary cell does much more easily.

I'm sorry, I don't see ANY new or useful science in this article.

I don't find electricity that costly for what it does in our lives. It is more the way it is produced is the problem. Some people post it takes 20,000$ to get off the grid now divide that by you monthly bill and it is how many years??? Now put solar cells on all those office buildings and feed that into the grid during the day ( which is peak time) and that would help

I lived off the grid for years.
Three panals, a dime a day for cooking & hot water propane, planed to do a lot better, but local "Zoneing Laws" got me stoped. NO wind power,my generator will mean poor real estate values for my neighbors.

Can't do ANYTHING to the house now unless we tie to the (more-than-50%-loss)grid, put in central heatimg, tie to a never-to-be-constructed-sewer,
pay tens of $thousands in permit fees and inspection costs..
Point one: store power in Nitrogen from the air & water-electrosed Hydrogen = NH3, acts like propane, burns with more power than H in existing engines, as natural as rabbit piss..
We sold 6.4 Billion pounds of NH3 in the USA last year.
Point two: lead acid storage cells are a very mature product, 100 percent recycled in some industries with 20 year life guarantees and very well understood. And, overpriced.
Point three: some experts claim that "no photovoltac panel has yet to produce the energy it took to place it in service".
Point last: "bluebook deregulation"
of electricity in the 1990's guaranteed that the obvious "economy-of-scale" that condominiums and small neighborhood sharing agreements, that would make common local "co-generation" a practical reality WOULD NEVER HAPPEN.
That cost is much larger than the 40-100 $Billion that BigPower stole from the taxpayers by withholding electricity for a few days in 2004.
I hope everyone is enjoying enslavement by other means.

If only electricity wasn't essential to human life!

Less than a hundred years of electrification for the majority in the "west" and already nearly no one can envision a World without it.

Humorous.

RE: wolf123 August 5th, 2008 8:47 pm
PaulMagillSmith August 5th, 2008 6:10 pm

"Of this 68 MILLION acres of public land, much of it is forrest, mountainous, swampy or pristine wilderness, and you want to chop down the forrest, I have no idea what you will do with the mountainous areas"

First let me state that if they can build a ski resort on top of a mountain, or Disneyland in the area of swampland known as Florida your objections don't wash. Where there's a will there's a way.

And: "Despite what sen. what's his name says there is NOT oil under every one of the 68 million acres of land the oil companies have a lease on, probably 98% is what the oil business terminology calls a goat pasture, nothing but dirt, dirt and more dirt, but it looks good on their balance sheet."

Of course there isn't oil under every acre, no senator made that claim (but there is geothermal energy under EVERY state to heat EVERY home in the US...and with existing technological capability). BTW, 68 million acres is the total leased, but 34 million are un-developed.

So basically what you are telling me is it's only, "...goat pasture, nothing but dirt, dirt and more dirt, but it looks good on their balance sheet."

So what you are telling me is:

1) The land is useless for oil, but out of the kindness of their hearts toward the people & government they are still paying millions in lease fees for worthless leases? Give me a break! Are we talking about these same oil companies that put profit before people's lives, the welfare of their bottom line before patriotic duty to country, or some 'other' oil companies?

2) If the land is useless, yet they are wasting stockholder funds by leasing 'worthless' land, doesn't this make them criminally liable to fraud charges? I wonder how they weigh these fees against assets on their balance sheet.

One more thing:

You said, "our current electrical grid sucks and you are not at this time getting enough bang for the buck that oil, nuclear, hydro and coal give you..."

Most sensible, intelligent, informed people are willing to bet that if wind, solar, geothermal, & tidal were blessed with the same largesse of funds fossil fuels & nuclear have garnered in subsidies these last 50+ years, getting rid of coal fired & nuclear power plants wouldn't even be discussed now because...WE WOULDN'T NEED THEM.

Are you even aware that as of 2005, alternate cleaner sources (mostly wind, solar, geothermal, & small hydro-electric, but including natural gas, which only produces 1/3 the GHG as other fossil fuels) produce more power worldwide than all nuclear worldwide?

Let's fund the technologies of the 21st century, instead of oil, coal, and nuclear, from the 20th or even 19th. We're in for an amazing ride if we can get these obstructionist road bumps from our path. The theatrics of the 'drill, drill, drill' Republicans demonstrating in Congress doesn't advance the cause of America, only their oil indentured selves.

wolf123 is a Big Energy troll. Suddenly concerned about the environmental devastation that clean renewable solar power installed on rooftops will cause.

"you are not at this time getting enough bang for the buck that oil, nuclear, hydro and coal give you."

MY FAMILY LIVES WELL OFF THE GRID WITH ONLY THREE LARGE SOLAR PANELS AND TWO 6 VOLT BATTERIES WITH INEXPENSIVE INVERTER AND CONTROLLER. TOTAL COST THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS. REPEAT THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS. The solar revolution is real and has been working for decades, yet few will bother to live at this level ( we have only a small DVD, limited lighting, tiny refrigerator, no workshop capacity.)....Unless and until the people in this luxury-accustomed and delusional society realize that life without large expenditures of energy and water is possible, nothing will happen until fuel and water become EXPENSIVE.

IF YOU WANT CHANGE THINK 20 DOLLAR GASOLINE!!!

PaulMagillSmith August 5th, 2008 6:10 pm

Of this 68 MILLION acres of public land, much of it is forrest, mountainous, swampy or pristine wilderness, and you want to chop down the forrest, I have no idea what you will do with the mountainous areas or the swamps and pave over pristine wilderness areas with your solar panels that capture 10-20% of the energy that hits it (only one company can surpass 15%). You are joking right? When you can get 80-90% capture it will cut down immensely on your land use and it may be practical. Just remember just because there may be a large land area that does not seem to have any use that does not mean someone is not using it. In the south west vast areas of what appear to be vacant land is OWNED by some sovereign indian tribe. Vast areas are also used by the military, the gila bend az air force gunnery range, 29 palms marine base calif, area 54 nevada. Then you have the joshua national park, the saguaro cactus national forrest. You plan on chopping down the saguaro cactus or the joshua trees? The sierra club and all the other environmental fanatics will drop so many law suits on you you will not know which way is up. Solar and other green sources of energy can make us energy independent but you will need to create a brand new infrastructure, our current electrical grid sucks and you are not at this time getting enough bang for the buck that oil, nuclear, hydro and coal give you. When you can generate mega watts on a small footprint of land then you are talking. Right now you can't, in 10 - 15 years maybe that's why we need to keep improving.

Despite what sen. what's his name says there is NOT oil under every one of the 68 million acres of land the oil companies have a lease on, probably 98% is what the oil business terminology calls a goat pasture, nothing but dirt, dirt and more dirt, but it looks good on their balance sheet.

An excellent breakthrough for sure.

However... something tells me they've been sitting on this breakthrough (and the 10X more efficient solar panels breakthrough... both from MIT by coincidence) for some unknown length of time...

And only now that the energy crisis is front and center on the public stage are these "break throughs" finally being revealed. The big energy crooks must be having some emergency backroom board meetings... with the main agenda topic set as, "How are we going to position ourselves as Energy Pimp #1 on this one?"

Just what about the batteries the Israelis, made mimicing the Ark of the Covenent, that were made with gold, that never lost their charge, ????
at a Trillion dollars for Iraq,,,fiasco, we all could have solar, wind and gold batteries,,,,just think pay once and never again,,,NIRVANA, sounds sooo good, like a single blue pill that cures everyting, including death--Malthus be damed, life forever, sounds like---don't say it... shhh

Thanks all for your replys to my comment, an I guess I hit a few nerves & tweaked some memory synapses. One of my favorite expressions is, "We row our boat forward by looking back". I just received a link fom my usually progressive brother dealing with gas prices that claimed the Dems were responible for the drastic rise in price since they have controlled both houses during the latest extreme rise. What the article fails to mention is the obstructionism by the Repugs, AND that this rise is the outcome of policies they put in place long before Dems regained a slim majority in congress. (go back to Cheney's secret meeting with oil companies to develope an energy policy, something that important to America should have been transparent).

Some of you have obviously done your homework on this issue, and I'm not talking about just sitting in front of the 'glass teat' and believing all the spin the major networks try to propagandize/distract us with. I'm sure if the people had as much money to spend advertising in the media, as the fossil fuel & nuclear industries do, the paradigm on energy policy would be quite different. Looking at who owns the majority of the media, cross referenced with other boards their top executves sit on, is quite revealing also.

Now to a few specific comments:

wolf123 said:
"coal fired or nuclear power plants take up a few hundred acres you're talking about a few hundred thousand acres."

So what? The oil companies already have locks on 68 MILLION acres of public land they aren't doing much with (if anything except to tie the land up for future gouging of the public) yet they want to get a lock on even more land. Do they even comprehend, "Use it or lose it", can easily become, "Use it or we will take it back and turn it into massive wind, solar, and bio-fuel farms"? From some research I've done I've found the argument about power loss from transmission to be 5% or less, which is negligible & inconsequential when the source is almost free & non-polluting/dangerous, to be a straw-man one.

RE: Peacefreak August 5th, 2008 2:29 pm
"Hydrogen fuel cells are a hoax to extract large grants from taxpayers to play with their toy. It has been proven to be impracticle. Support from this hoax is coming from the Oil Lobbies..."

Complete agreement here. First, by all accounts fuel cells won't be viable for 15-20 years, then there is a 16.8 year time lag to replace the existing fleet of vehicles on the road now (same for electric, air power, or hybrid powered vehicles). Next, take a look at who is backng this as of yet unproven technology...the BushCONS & the oil companies...WHY?...because it is a continuation of the domination of the means of supply by the same companies & people who own it now. Gasoline stations will become hydrogen stations, with the same opportunity for manipulative pricing we see now.

RE: Jim Glover August 5th, 2008 1:41 pm
"Someone suggested compressed air for later use compressing the air with the extra solar or wind power when available. Good idea too.

Compressed air cars will be coming out soon too."

Yes they will, Jim, as a matter of fact India will release the first mass produced 'air car' for public sale in 2009, with France & Australia not far behind. Nice features include lighter weight, no need for air conditioning because the super-cooled air it emits to power the engine provides its own, emmissions are clean breathable air, and during off peak times wind & solar can pump compressed air into underground caverns (used up oil wells)to be stored & used later much like a battery stores energy.

We have numerous options. It's now a matter of the will to make the necessary leap away from fossil fuels & nuclear. Just like the Stone, Bronze, Iron, & Steam Ages, the Oil Age needs to become a part of human history that got us to the present. If we are to survive & prosper none of these ages represent our future.

Electricity is used to split water into H2 and O2 for ages. The question here is how much, if any, electric power reduced by using catalysts? If the reduction is more than 5% then it is really a breakthrough, if more than 10% then it is a big one.
By the way you don't have to compress H2 to store it, can use a big balloon (outside naturally and protected from lightning).

whyisthisasurprise,

I posted this on fly wheels a few spots up:

http://www.launchpnt.com/Power_Ring.31.0.html

lots of info/cost comparisons there.

Scientific American published an article many years ago about energy storage using ultra-high speed flywheel technology with flywheels that would store useful energy up to 18 months. The inefficiencies of battery, water and other storage means were discussed and compared.

Does anyone know what became of this?

Too true Peacefreak.

I was looking into using LiFEPO4 batteries in an electric conversion of my VW rather than Lead-acid (they have a much higher charge density and are lighter) but the manufacturers will only sell low A-hr rated units (ie under about 10 A-hr) to retail users. the 80 A-hr ones, although available, are only sold to commercial developers like GM et al for Hybrids etc.

Hydrogen fuel cells are a hoax to extract large grants from taxpayers to play with their toy. It has been proven to be impracticle. Support from this hoax is coming from the Oil Lobbies as a way to slowdown battery technology which is far enough along to store as much energy as we need for almost any application. It needs only to be put into production. China is the only country that is doing this in earnest. That is because they don't have oil lobbies in China and China recognizes the urgency of this need.

GottaGetOffTheGrid, Good Stuff!

Here is some more on similar technologies...

http://www.pureenergysystems.com/news/2004/06/12/690021_AEC_HydrogenfromWater/index.html

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2008/2243094.htm

There is also research into high-rpm mag-lev fly wheels that spin in an vacuum chamber:

http://www.launchpnt.com/Power_Ring.31.0.html

These store excess power machanically and are much higher efficiency.

PaulMagillSmith August 5th, 2008 10:23 am

"the power is piped in from miles away. Don't you imagine the same could be done from solar farms located outside the city as well, duh?"

coal fired or nuclear power plants take up a few hundred acres you're talking about a few hundred thousand acres. Unless you want to chop down a forest or pave over a few dozen farms (and loose the food grown there), there isn't any room.

Someone suggested compressed air for later use compressing the air with the extra solar or wind power when available. Good idea too.

Compressed air cars will be coming out soon too.

Like this CD article, So many choices burning oil that we need for plastic and nylon is going to be history soon.
There is also the new technology of reverse electrolysis that burns the oxygen and hydrogen from salt water or any water in the engine without storing or compressing... I wonder if it is true ...Well see. http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Jivb7lupDNU

This could be older but similar tech that the Japanese are using http://waterpoweredcar.com/stanmeyer.html

Daimler had a hydrogen-powered bus on the streets of Stuttgart, Germany back in 1969. There was an article in Scientific American at the time. Due to lack of interest, the project was discontinued.

It seems that producing power for stationary use is not the primary concern. Transport of people and goods using compressed hydrogen is a major problem. Packing metal hydrides in the pressure tank is a method of storing more hydrogen than in an empty vessel of the same initial volume. More work needs to be done.

The new smart battery chargers are very efficient.

Use at least a 800 watt converter to power a 40 amp charger; and charge your lead/acid storage batteries.

I have a deep cycle battery in my truck and I dump it when I get home. I set the inverter on the air cleaner; and a 12 ga. extension cord runs to the charger by the batteries.

The big 1200 watt inverter (x-one from checker auto @ $119) has a fan that only come on when it gets hot.

If the batteries are charged I run everything off the auto's battery.

If I need more power I start up the generator.

to paul k.
sure you can use electrolysis to separate out the H & O as when you were a kid... I am guessing that because of: "The new catalyst consists of cobalt metal, phosphate and an electrode, placed in water." it is the catalyst that makes it somehow more efficient than when we were kids. Perhaps the catalyst induces lesser amounts of current used, inorder to produce the gases? The article is really unclear what the breakthru is, or the benefit.

as a side note, if i had an electrolysis apparatus not unlike Dr. Nocera's it may be more efficient/practical than my currently used 'medical oxygen generator' that constantly runs in my house, using vast amounts of electricity, creating alot of heat pollution, and noise pollution, and truely is just an air compressor and doesn't really enrich the oxygen output much at all.

wild

PaulMagillSmith shouldn't knock high urban population densities. Although places like Manhattian or Hong Kong may be excessive from a livability standpoint, there is considerable efficiency in maintaining a high population density in communities. Central heat plants, larger buildings, public transportation, and walkability all greatly reduce the carbon footprints of city dwellers compared to rural ones.

High urban population densities also conserve tillable rural land and wild areas.

There is a lot more localism in the city too - more small family owned businesses and more access to local produce in public and farmers markets.

I lived off the grid, using photovoltaic panels for juice, for 21 years, so I have a sense of what a real breakthrough would look like and this does seem important. Batteries are the weak link, and the lead acid golf cart batteries I used had to be overcharged periodically to prevent them from declining in efficiency (so I used a gas-powered generator to bump them). And to keep the whole thing affordable on a modest income I used LP gas for refrigeration, cooking and hot water. "Kind of off the grid" would be a better description. This will definitely make solar power more useful—and as Amory Lovins has pointed out, fuel cells deliver pure hot water as "exhaust" which helps solve one of the otherwise heavy demands for power.

What I see happening, and what will not be in the control of the power companies as this unfolds, is exactly what happened to the record industry as musicians began to have the tools to self-produce CDs and online files, or what is happening in my industry—publishing. Print-on-demand publishing is decentralizing the book industry as authors and editors gain control of the means of production. If we survive the economic meltdown and oil shock that are coming, and the population hump bearing down on us, we might cobble together a sustainable technological society in a few decades.

By the way, per Malthus: our temporary escape from his scenario has been provided via fossil fuels. The Green Revolution depended on heavy doses of artificial fertilizers which are heavily reliant on natural gas. The post-oil-peak world is going to face a major food crisis which alternative power will be hard-pressed to alleviate. Oil is food.

It's probably a useful discovery, but I produced oxygen and hydrogen from two electrodes as a kid.

Storing the hydrogen is still a problem. We may yet discover that it's cheaper to store compressed air in the back yard as an electricity source for later use.

I don't know how much platinum this system requires, or whether it gets used up at a very slow/fast rate, but I do know there are about 300 million cars in the US that have a hunk of it in their catalytic converters, and with hydrogen, electric, or air cars catalytic converters would be unnecessary.

As far as the whiners who claim ther isn't enough surface area in Manhattan to provide sufficient electricity from solar panels I will just say, "Get a fucking grip on reality & open your minds". You live in a too heavily overpopulated area (which is a part of the problem the world faces altogether), but your electricity has to come from somewhere. Are there any coal fired or nuclear power plants in downtown Manhattan? NO, the power is piped in from miles away. Don't you imagine the same could be done from solar farms located outside the city as well, duh?

RE: rtdrury August 5th, 2008 12:56 am
"The engineered gasoline prices have begun their steady decline for the election."

I like the way you phrased that, "...engineered gasoline prices...", and for those with short memories try to think back to just before the 2004 election...same scenario. It has been pretty much proven by the facts that 'drill, drill, drill' is an asinine assumption to lower gas prices that only aids Big Oil. Isn't it interesting that when demand is down, with supply virtually unchanged, prices rose until Congress (some in congress anyway) started talking of perhaps even criminal charges for speculators who are manipulating the market? If this is some of the 'psychology' that is supposed to influence the market so much, well bring it on...and plenty more even.

I'm not a big Obama fan after the FISA vote, but I will admit the energy policy he laid out in Lansing yesterday makes a hell of a lot more sense than what the oil & blood soaked Republicans are bringing to the table. How's this for a stat I read this morning. Drilling the OCS & ANWR will lower gas at the pump about 6 cents...IN 2030...but proper tire pressure & tune ups will save 12 cents a gallon RIGHT NOW, according to the DOE & EPA.

I have a feeling that Mr Nocera is about to be disappeared, like the car that runs on water.

BUT - what are it's military implications?
will it frighten the terrists?
will they hate us even more when we don't buy their oil?

I want to get excited -- I really do --, but I'll wait for the replication that science inevitably demands. Remember cold fusion.

sounds good but what about the WATER!

water is not a limitless resource. it is, in fact, the 21st century oil (and more)

There is a man (Mike Strizki) in New Jersey that is living totally off the grid and doing something similar to this already. His system was very expensive and requires a bit of acreage to pull off.

This article indicates that the process may be able to be scaled down.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0315/p12s01-sten.html

Tesla discovered free energy, but could not get the financing needed to develop it. When JP Morgan found it he could not put a meter on it and profit from it, he called in his loans and bankrupted the poor guy.

Many people live in apartment buildings, many homeowners are struggling to make mortgage payments meaning little money to invest in upgrading their electricity system. I do not see the reason for much optimism here under the current system.

So what about people living in apartments, condos, or even most townhouses? And what about those BIG GOVERNMENT zoning laws keeping solar panals off even homes in certain zoning areas? Oh yeah, and with all those rising foreclosures, forget it. However, good luck if you can use it.

The engineered gasoline prices have begun their steady decline for the election. You can ask your neighbors if the lower price makes them feel better about voting for capitalist establishment candidates.

It is illustrative that a grant of only $10 million produced results so quickly. Contrast that with the billions allowed oil companies for research which produces a finding that more money is necessary.

$10 million in the spring... and here it is august already... odd how a little went a long ways so fast huh?

Imagine if we spent billions on alternative energy research... at this rate?

Seems money well spent. A first?

txbodhi, Tesla worked within the system. The better way is to work outside the system -it's called localism.

The capitalist's argument that small enterprises are hugely inefficient is meaningful only under the erroneous assumption that large enterprises are hugely efficient. They're not. Large enterprises are terribly inefficient.

For example, they could utilize almost all of the 75% energy waste in electric power plants. But they don't!

They could promote hugely efficient rail transport, but they promote inefficient cars and trucks instead.

They could make cars ten times more efficient but they want us to consume more, not less, fuels and materials.

They could set the amount of economic activity to satisfy our basic needs to 15 hours work per week. But instead they are pushing it up to 40 and more hours per week.

So when the capitalist opens his mouth about efficiencies, you know how to close it. Now go local!

I'm after a way to generate power on demand so no storage is necessary. No fuel, no oxidation.

I have decided to found a new organization, to be called the C.I.A., which stands for Crackpot Inventors of America.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan

This is great for southern Cal. BUT, HOW do you power NYC with it ?? My condo faces north and I rarely if ever get direct sun light. Where pray tell are you going to put ALL these solar photovoltaic cells. Do you know how many server farms are in banks and other business just in downtown Manhattan and how much electricity they use? Far more than these solar photovoltaic cells can produce, "current solar panels capture 10-20% of the energy that hits it", that sucks even 30% sucks. When you can get 80-90% then you will have something.

The beauty of this system is that it is decentralized. Each building will have it's own power plant. Centralization makes only a few people, management and stockholders, wealthy while the rest of us pay through the nose. Decentralization benefits everyone.

About 6 months ago I heard about a research team here in Austin Texas who had developed a real breakthrough battery, a capacitor battery much more efficient, quick to charge up cheaply. The fact I haven't heard anything else probably means the evil Petroleum companies are up to their old evil tricks suppressing workable ecological alternatives to petroleum. Big corporations and billionaires have been up doing this wickedness since the 1930's when Billionaire Morgan suppressed Tesla's cheap energy discovery. These Oligarchs have some heavy karma.

was it 10 or 15 years ago,..some small lab in Europe, developed a cold fusion lab apparatus that produced MORE energy than it consumed..

they released their findings to the scientific community, whom immediately set out to disprove this obviously preposterous claim.

the same apparatus was set up to specifications, published by the original scientists, in labs around the world ( especially the oil funded research ones!)

a few days passed and results of successful duplication of the surplus energy generation, as claimed by the original scientists, was reported in the MSM.

This reporting continued sporadically for maybe a week, then suddenly the MSM got amnesia..

not a peep was ever seen, heard, nor spoken of this "discovery "again

the fate of the "discovery " we now discuss, awaits the same fate i fear.

simplify
do it for yourself, barter for that which is out of your skill set.

turn off the TV, read a book , take a walk, go meet your neighbors.

plant a garden or buy from your local farmers.

only use a vehicle if you must , ride a bike , take the bus when you are able.

stop buying crap. a pair of pants does the same thing whether one pays 25$ for them or 100$, a little logo does not make them superior.

starve the beast of its food .. your cash.
starve the beast of its air .. your fear.

I need a solar cell that is 1/2 the current cost and double the current efficiency. This is not an insane request….but it is many years away at the moment.

There are much more efficient methods of converting solar energy to electricity than photovoltaic cells. Parabolic collectors and Sterling Cycle engines for one.

The technology of storing hydrogen as a hydride is in the development stage but not yet sufficiently advanced to be practical.

sbrownn August 4th, 2008 2:00 pm said:

Both gasses would need to be compressed for efficient storage. Is enough energy generated to both produce and compress the gasses for storage?"

I once read that hydrogen could be stored safely as hydrides, needing no compression.

Poet August 4th, 2008 3:42 pm said:

"This was the great error of Malthus' carefully postualted theories of inevitable cataclysmic poverty through over population. He could not visualize the world beyond the subsistence farming economy in which he lived ever changing"

Malthus was right. Limits to growth are shown by the sociological, psychological and ecological problems of overcrowding. This will happen no matter how many technological fixes we invent to support an increasing human monoculture. This is true for all species. That we are apart from nature is a faith based argument.

Sounds Earth-Shaking, but

Most cobalt comes from The Congo and is dripping with the blood of black children, women and men.

Still, choke on it Rex Tillman.

This is the best news I've heard in weeks!

Imagine how quickly solar could be implemented if we'd direct our attention to this planet instead of outer space. Not to mention that the time, energy and resources spent on wars and military build up could produce clean solar energy in time to save the Earth from environmental disaster.

For the time being this beats "Cold Fusion" hands down. Folks, if the economics even come close to breaking even buy into wind and solar, be part of a very important anti-corporate revolution!

Physics:

The article can be found here
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18669820

If you still can't get to it, I can send you a copy vanelzak AT C0L0RAD0 D0T EDU

what?! a big utility company not making a profit? they'll never ever allow that.....

This is a field I know something about. I wish I had the 'Science' article in front of me.

The general process, called 'electrolysis' of water is not 'new'..that's the press getting science wrong again as it so often does. In fact, you can do the same thing with a pair of copper strips, and a high voltage DC (direct current) supply. Connect the copper strips to the poles of the supply and emmerse them in vinegar water or very salty water (The vineagar or salt are just so electricity will conduct.) and you'll see two gasses forming on the wires connected to the poles. Oxygen connects at the positive side and hydrogen at the negative side.

Look it up on wikipedia...it's all there.

What sounds 'new' here is the ability to use water that doesn't have anything disolved in it. And I presume an increase in the efficiency of the process perhaps?

The problems of collecting the hydrogen are then very very serious.

What is far LESS serious would be to simply take that 'excess' solar energy and store it in a lead-acid car battery. I did these calculations and concluded that 4 Marine batteries would store enough energy to power my home for 4 days. WITHOUT haveing to deal with a gas that has an explosive range which far exceeds gasoline.

The big problem, where I live, is that I'm not sure, given the 16% efficiency of solar cells, that this is enough given the few sunny days we have. Indeed, I'd end up using the energy right away!

I need a solar cell that is 1/2 the current cost and double the current efficiency. This is not an insane request....but it is many years away at the moment.

Sorry for THREE of the same postings everybody. WordPress was acting weird about an hour ago so I didn't know if I posted or not.

BTW: I should have mentioned that I fully support Nocera's work. It's good old American ingenuity--and a healthy dose of profit motive--that makes these things happen. Think of all the fantastic advancements were made in the 60's when the race for space was a national commitment. Think what can happen if the paradigm shifts in Washington and clean, alternative energy becomes a national priority!

Youbetterwork:
Platinum is in most car engines today in the catalytic converters because the metal turns some noxious gases into less noxious gases. There is about $238 worth of platinum in a VW Passat, for instance. Granted, another metal likely would be less expensive but it's platinum that does the job for now. Platinum used in this hydrogen/oxygen "engine" would be cleaner overall and would produce much longer in this application.

Abe:
I tend to agree with you. Unfortunately, most Americans are energy gluttons and would need fairly large battery banks to even come close to their consumption with solar power.

I'm in Southern CA and in the solar industry. I gave an estimate to a man in Palm Springs two years ago who paid $1300 during August (to SoCal Edison)--mostly for air conditioning and pool filtration. I calculated his rate of return for a photovoltaic system was the quickest I'd ever encountered--about five years. He still didn't buy saying he could make more in the stock market with the same money(?) Conversely, I sold a very modest system to a frugal retired couple here in San Diego who likely would break even on their investment in 25 years! Their movivation: They wanted to use clean electricity and to show a good example to their grandson and neighbors.

My point is everyone has his own priorities. And those with the McMansions, the Excursions or Hummers and all the electronic gadgetry of the day--the ones who could really benefit from solar--don't really give a damn.

Look at the guy's face, with an expression like that, that says omg so awesome... should be great!

nicnews, jpbreeze,

It will be difficult for vested interests to suppress this technology. Electrolysis is demonstrated in every high school chemistry class and the concept of using this technology to store energy captured by photovoltaics has been around for decades. The technical advance here is in the selection of catalysts that boosts the efficiency of the process. While a specific apparatus could perhaps be patented, there are an infinite number of variations on this theme.

What's the catch? Oh nothing really. Except that such an energy conversion/storage mechanism can and will be owned/controlled by the capitalist beast to continue its enslavement of people.

Oh the inventor gets some royalties. But the ownership and control of production, the "rights" to build the photovoltaic panels, the electrolysis equipment, the gas storage tanks, and the fuel cell, the right to control the market, the government, the people, will be owned by umm Westinghouse, and will be worth umm, $100 billion. MIT gets a share of the jackpot to attract students.

You won't have the political power to protect your rights. You depend on Westinghouse for your electricity fix, so let the beast decide which rights you will have - don't ask for privacy - you can't have it.

Solution: try reliance on small local independent farmers, craftsmen and merchants for your energy, food, etc.

MIT Energy Initiative:
http://web.mit.edu/mitei

Energy STORAGE really is something that is holding back a switch to solar and wind. Those things are fine for when it is daytime and windy, but that's obviously not 100% of the time. Fuel cell research is really important for that reason. Interestingly, McCain has offered huge rewards for technology breakthroughs in this area.

It sounds like this is just electrolysis without the need for an electrolyte, which is indeed a useful step. people have been electrloysing water for over a century, but the old process used a corrosive compound in the water, which ate up electrodes and required careful control of the current to be sustainable. Putting this nice clean hydrogen into a fuel cell solves the contamination problem from hydrogen derived by other means. Storage of the gas is still a problem, though.

Yay! and there's more coming too!
Soon, we'll see major breakthroughs in preventative medicine and sound technology...
Stay tuned for the age of Aquarius with its hallmarks of eco-compatible technology, principled love and expanded consciousness.
Love and Light,
Sunyata
http://www.mythiclove.net/sunyata

If you stick wires from any battery into water oxygen and hydrogen will bubble off the ends, so electrolysis is not too difficult. The article claims to have a catalyst that will encourage this reaction, but there is no actual information, so we can only presume, or hope, that the catalyst increases the rate of electrolysis. But, no information. Energy still needs to be pumped through the wires. Hydrogen production is a now-famous energy sink; it takes more energy to produce it than one gets back from the gas. And....commerical application for this alleged new technique is still 10 years out. Interpretation: Give us a big, multi-milliion dollar grant to study this further.

As mentioned above, solar is already available. My system, including 8 golf cart batteries, cost $10,000, and is very functional.

Hey, a step is a step. We will never "arrive" at perfection, but each creative step takes us in a direction...it's a good thing.

This was the great error of Malthus' carefully postualted theories of inevitable cataclysmic poverty through over population. He could not visualize the world beyond the subsistence farming economy in which he lived ever changing.

This is great news--but the devil (as always) is in the details. Gaurantees of the future prosperity of all mankind into the forseeable future is not something the minders of the "little people"--ie you and me--want to see happen but if this bell is rung loud and far enough it may already be too late for "them" to do squat about it.

So much of science is the cross pollination of fertile minds by new ideas and paradigms that this will be interesting to follow. What could the Japanese, Chinese, Russians, and Scandanavians do with this breakthrough? Hmmm

I'm sure Enron, PG&E, PP&L, etc. will all sit back and go right along with this change. Honestly, I don't expect to ever see anything like this in widespread use, there are too many hard-headed, greedy A-holes who want to control our power supply. Something needs to be done about them as well.

Youbetterwork: Platinum is in most car engines today in the catalytic converters because the metal turns some noxious gases into less noxious gases. There is about $238 worth in platinum in a VW Passat, for instance. Granted, another metal likely would be less expensive but it's platinum that does the job for now. Platinum used in this hydrogen/oxygen "engine" would be cleaner and would produce much longer.

Abe: I tend to agree with you. Unfortunately, most Americans are energy gluttons and would need pretty large battery banks to even come close to their consumption with solar power.

I'm in Southern CA and in the solar industry. I gave an estimate to a man in Palm Springs two years ago who paid $1300 during August (to SoCal Edison)--mostly for air conditioning and pool filtration. I calculated his rate of return for a photovoltaic system was the quickest I'd ever encountered. He still didn't buy saying he could make more in stock investments with the same money(?) Conversely, I sold a very modest system to a frugal retired couple here in San Diego who likely would break even on their investment in 25 years! Their movivation: They wanted to use clean electricity and to show a good example to their grandson and neighbors.

My point is everyone has his own priorities. And those with the McMansions, the Excursions or Hummers and all the electronic gadgetry of the day--the ones who could really benefit from solar--don't really give a damn.

Youbetterwork: Platinum is in most car engines today in the catalytic converters because the metal turns some noxious gases into less noxious gases. There is about $238 worth in platinum in a VW Passat, for instance. Granted, another metal likely would be less expensive but it's platinum that does the job for now. Platinum used in this hydrogen/oxygen "engine" would be cleaner and would produce much longer.

Abe: I tend to agree with you. Unfortunately, most Americans are energy gluttons and would need pretty large battery banks to even come close to their consumption with solar power.

I'm in Southern CA and in the solar industry. I gave an estimate to a man in Palm Springs two years ago who paid $1300 during August (to SoCal Edison)--mostly for air conditioning and pool filtration. I calculated his rate of return for a photovoltaic system was the quickest I'd ever encountered. He still didn't buy saying he could make more in stock investments with the same money(?) Conversely, I sold a very modest system to a frugal retired couple here in San Diego who likely would break even on their investment in 25 years! Their movivation: They wanted to use clean electricity and to show a good example to their grandson and neighbors.

My point is everyone has his own priorities. And those with the McMansions, the Excursions or Hummers and all the electronic gadgetry of the day--the ones who could really benefit from solar--don't really give a damn.

This is not just an innovation with consequences for solar, but for any intermittent energy technology that could use an energy storage mechanism, like H2. Electrolysis has been known about for years, but it this makes it more efficient it'll find application in many places like, for example, H2-powered cars. The main problem with H2 powered cars is making the H2 in the first place. This process could have huge ramifications in moving us toward a 'hydrogen economy'

Look, this really is not that big a deal . . . folks can live off-the-grid presently as we all do where I live and you simply store solar energy in golf cart batteries or floor sweeper batteries which are cheap and easily available. For a $20,000 investment in solar panels, a charge controller, inverter, six batteries and time with a qualified electrician you too could live off-the-grid by next week. No having to wait for scientists to perfect some convoluted hydrogen system.

For a modest investment of $3000 you could have an off-the-grid system that will allow you to power one light, a radio and your lap-top every evening.

But is the platinum 'reused'? It would be 'cheaper' if one platinum rod was used for the life of the machine- that's different from oil.

And current solar panels capture 10-20% of the energy that hits it (30% collectors are in the works) but still, if they were on every rooftop in this country (they end up paying for themselves in under 10 years) even 10% of "In one hour, enough sunlight strikes the Earth to provide the entire planet's energy needs for one year" is still a lot.

And even if solar panels are not hooked up to this new process, even just collecting energy during peak hours will conserve energy use during the most costly time of day (proven).

The future is here. Don't wait for washington. Get your own town to do it! (Any homeowners out there? Get your local Property Secretary to work on getting solar technology as a deductable to your home!)

Platinum is rarer and more expensive than gold or oil... You can't use that...

It is an amazing discovery and is one third of the basic problems for point of use energy gerneration. The other two are storage of hydrogen and the fuel cell. Hydrogen storage is notoriously inefficient and fuel cells are notoriously expensive. Never the less one down and two to go and we can detach from the grid!

Anyone wonder who might not want that to happen?

The gov and oil companies will co-opt this technology to enhance their own profit margin!

Both gasses would need to be compressed for efficient storage. Is enough energy generated to both produce and compress the gasses for storage?

EUREKA - It's about time! Now, let's see the gov and oil companies hide this info!