If this is actually possible, and they really do commercalize this product, it could mean instantaneous change. There would be no need for a hydrogen infrastructure - filling stations and the like. You'd just have this little box with a solar panel on it that would convert water to hydrogen. The problem with hydrogen fuel cells, which still hasn't been solved, is that they require platinum or other rare metals in order to function. The cathodes and anodes are made of metals to catalyze the reaction within the cell. So, if everyone started using fuel cells, we'd still be using a non-renewable resource, it would just be a different non-renewable resource.

Still, switching to these sorts of technologies will be a good start in getting away from fossil fuels.

Note that the hydrogen-making device in the article is the thing the size of the microwave oven. The article says "runs on mains power or from a solar panel"; it doesn't say how much energy it actually needs (or how many Watts of power for how many hours) to make enough hydrogen to run a "family car for up to 150 kilometres". Unfortunately, cars take a lot of energy to run, and so the corresponding solar panel (or more likely, array of solar panels) would probably have to be pretty huge. This article is interesting because as far as I know, home-scale hydrogen electrolyzers are not yet commercially available, but I don't think this is more of a subtle technology development than a major scientific breakthrough.

Electrolysis is easy to do poorly - if you just run some current between some electrodes (pieces of metal or something else conductive like graphite) in some salty water, and you'll get some hydrogen gas - but harder to do well, so a small, practical electrolyzer is still a great thing if we're ever going to serioulsy be using hydrogen as an energy storage medium.

Unfortunately, this still doesn't work. Production of cars requires an enormous amount of non-renewable resources. You need fuel to mine the metal, fuel to transport components and electronics, electricity in vast quantities to make it into car components, and most of the interior is made out of plastic -- oil. As the price of energy escalates, it will simply become too expensive to produce they type of cars we take for granted today, whether they're hydrogen powered or not.

So, if everyone started using fuel cells, we'd still be using a non-renewable resource, it would just be a different non-renewable resource.



This exactly why you here Bush and the big Energy companies talk about fuel cells and not Bio Diesel. I am not saying the Bio Diesel is the end all solution. However, it can be plugged into the existing and emerging Diesel infrastructure to alievate the strain on Oil. As long as there is a finite source for energy it is good for the energy companies bottom line.



I would be interested to know how efficient this is and if it could be used for heating/cooling a house.

I don't see how this solves anything. You are taking electricity from the grid and turning it into hydrogen. Same as a battery.

In the article it says "if" you have PVC's. You can have wind or whatever. Anyone that follows PVC's knows that for most homes today, you cannot provide enough power for you home, you really don't have enough surplus to create hydrogen. Many new battery technolagies use less precious materials and are more echo freindly.

Ok, maybe not BS, but I call Hype. and my Hypometer is tipping into the red.

You can't make energy that isn't there. Sunlight falls at a rate of 600-800W per sq meter, at the equator. The worlds best solar cells can only catch 35%. To produce enough to power a car that runs at an average of 40kw per hour, is going to take allot of solar panels. And no matter how efficient your hydrogen system is you cant change physics. even if they managed to produce is at 99% efficiency they would have to compress it to store it. Their system seems to be stationary, so let's assume they aren't going for HUGE energy density, they are still going to loose a large amount of power.

Then you need a fule cell to get it back out (or you windup using an ICE at 30% efficiency), don't try using it in the winter. Since the only efficient powercells operate at insanely high temperatures. (don't forget the above post, Fuel Cells are still way pricey)

All this so you can replace a Li-Poly or A123 battery system with 90% efficency and a 7 year life span. (more for stationary systems that don't run too low, and can afford slow chargin) (btw, fule cells need to be replaced often, how often depends on the tech)

Why do we want hydrogen again?

There is a story in WIRED about truckers using injected hydrogen produced from distilled water and from electricity generated from the their diesel engine's alternator.
http://www.wired.com/news/autotech/0,2554,69529,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_6
this doesn't replace the diesel, but it improves mileage by 10% while reducing emmissions. Reducing the size and weight and inneficiency of the electrolyzer would be a big bonus for them.

Additionally the TIGERS generator would be a good alternative to the Alternator too:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/09/tigers_exhaust_.html

I wonder what happens if you combine the TIGERS system with the Hydrogen system?

Seems to me that would take care of the electrical system quick enough to make it worth while to venture in a complete rethink of the diesel engine.

Makes me wonder what it could do for a Diesel Electric hybrid system with a TIGERS system could do?

D~W

Parabolic mirriors and steam generators is far more efficient than panels and batteries. The technolgy has been around before the discovery of oil research the stirling engine and dare to dream people