Chat Forum
It is currently Sat Aug 19, 2017 2:12 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 3:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31891
Location: in transit
The future is getting closer every day, my friends.

This is brilliant.

link

The basics of it are...

Quote:
RMIT researchers have created a new solar paint that absorbs moisture from the air and uses sunlight to split water atoms and harvest hydrogen as fuel.

The paint is a mix of titanium oxide, a common white pigment in wall paints, and a new material, synthetic molybdenum-sulphide, that acts like a silica gel sachet in the way it absorbs moisture.

But the new material also acts as a semi-conductor to catalyse the splitting of water into hydrogen and oxygen molecules, said RMIT lead researcher Dr Kourosh Kalantar-zadeh.

"Basically we are talking about producing fuel from the sun and water vapour in the air," he said. "It is a super simple idea that we have implemented very successfully. It can rival the photovoltaic cells we put on the roof."

"Our new development has a big range of advantages," Dr Daeneke said. "There's no need for clean or filtered water to feed the system. Any place that has water vapour in the air, even remote areas far from water, can produce fuel."

Dr Kalantar-zadeh added humidity was the key factor but the system worked in dry and hot climates near oceans without trouble.

The initial research published in the American Chemical Society's journal ACS Nano, proved the concept.

"What we have developed is the component that creates the fuel and converts the energy into hydrogen gas," Dr Daeneke said.

"For the final product we would need to incorporate this paint with membranes that are commercially available to harvest the hydrogen selectively and store it as gas for example."

The RMIT research team has released the findings to the public domain, rather than patent it, so the design can be improved upon by the scientific community and fast-tracked for commercial use.

Here's a one minute promo clip from RMIT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci6LKz0ajfI


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:27 am
Posts: 314
Location: Mostly in my own head
Listened to an interview on this yesterday on Radio NZ. :thumbup:

Really interested that it will be more efficient than solar in places with less sun.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6916
Location: Vandean Coast
Making hydrogen is one thing, but efficiently capturing it and using it to create energy will be hard especially if you're talking about trying to capture it from a massive surface area .
You'd need some kind of in-situ fuel cell I'd imagine, in which case you have to wonder if it will be any better than solar panels.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 319
Also pressurizing the hydrogen also energy intensive.


Last edited by rabble on Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 3143
Dudes. Buzz harshers. :thumbdown:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19462
Possible fire risk with all that hydrogen.

But generally, go for it.

The renewables revolution marches on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6916
Location: Vandean Coast
rabble wrote:
Also pressurizing the hydrogen also energy intensive.



You don't necessarily need to pressurise it if you're using it in real time


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 25607
Location: The garden county
That's a neat idea, but a long way from being a practical technology.
Researchers have been investigating MoS2 as a cheap alternative to Pt as a catalyst for hydrogen evolution for a while now (I even have a paper on the topic /globus). MoS2 performs fairly poorly compared to Pt, but it's cheap as chips, so it's trade-off. Using TiO2 provides a photocatalyst which provides the electrons needed to drive the reaction (usually an external voltage does this). That's a nice way of making it a standalone system without being powered.

How you collect the hydrogen is a problem then too. It's going to cost energy to collect and pressurise enough to be of use in a fuel cell.


Nice idea, not really usable. Also, it's not free energy, it's an inefficient conversion process which counters the inefficiency by working all the time. Also, the monolayer MoS2 flakes and TiO2 nanoparticles in the paint aren't exactly cheap.


deadduck wrote:
rabble wrote:
Also pressurizing the hydrogen also energy intensive.

You don't necessarily need to pressurise it if you're using it in real time


You wouldn't be using it in real time. The whole point of water splitting to produce hydrogen is that it's a means to store solar energy for use elsewhere or later. Harvest the sunlight and use that to produce H2, then use that in a fuel cell at a later stage to produce electricity. If you want to use solar energy in real time, then you'd just use a photovoltaic or dye-sensitised solar cell. The greater the number of processes between photons hitting your solar cell and you using the resulting power, the worse the efficiency. Each step costs energy. Generating H2 from photocatalysts and then immediately using it makes no sense at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1074
Nolanator wrote:
That's a neat idea, but a long way from being a practical technology.
Researchers have been investigating MoS2 as a cheap alternative to Pt as a catalyst for hydrogen evolution for a while now (I even have a paper on the topic /globus). MoS2 performs fairly poorly compared to Pt, but it's cheap as chips, so it's trade-off. Using TiO2 provides a photocatalyst which provides the electrons needed to drive the reaction (usually an external voltage does this). That's a nice way of making it a standalone system without being powered.

How you collect the hydrogen is a problem then too. It's going to cost energy to collect and pressurise enough to be of use in a fuel cell.


Nice idea, not really usable. Also, it's not free energy, it's an inefficient conversion process which counters the inefficiency by working all the time. Also, the monolayer MoS2 flakes and TiO2 nanoparticles in the paint aren't exactly cheap.


deadduck wrote:
rabble wrote:
Also pressurizing the hydrogen also energy intensive.

You don't necessarily need to pressurise it if you're using it in real time


You wouldn't be using it in real time. The whole point of water splitting to produce hydrogen is that it's a means to store solar energy for use elsewhere or later. Harvest the sunlight and use that to produce H2, then use that in a fuel cell at a later stage to produce electricity. If you want to use solar energy in real time, then you'd just use a photovoltaic or dye-sensitised solar cell. The greater the number of processes between photons hitting your solar cell and you using the resulting power, the worse the efficiency. Each step costs energy. Generating H2 from photocatalysts and then immediately using it makes no sense at all.


There you go with your f*cking facts, and knowledge and stuff ... :uhoh:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 25607
Location: The garden county
I've been posting on PR for nearly a decade, I just knew that someday the topic of conversation would turn to novel hydrogen evolution photocatalysts. PhD has finally come in useful. :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31891
Location: in transit
Nolanator wrote:
PhD has finally come in useful. :thumbup:


Not really. All you've done is say pooh pooh you can't do that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 25607
Location: The garden county
I reserve the right to shit on other people's ideas.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4499
Nolanator wrote:
I reserve the right to shit on other people's ideas.


Pretty sure that'd fudge this new paint stuff though...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5985
If they make it in NZ using black paint it will be successful. The only problem will be the Haka each time you turn it on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Posts: 31017
Location: Planet Rock
Nolanator wrote:
I've been posting on PR for nearly a decade, I just knew that someday the topic of conversation would turn to novel hydrogen evolution photocatalysts. PhD has finally come in useful. :thumbup:

If you had posted a copy of your degree that would that would have been useful (maybe not for you)but what good is having a degree in a subject discussed on PR. That is just bollocks


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3338
Nols, you're not involved in a hydrogen project that recently got EU funding that involves NI companies by any chance, are you? :o


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 25607
Location: The garden county
Nah, working on different stuff these days. Biomaterials. Still nanoscience, generally, but quite a different field.

What funding project was that?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6756
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
Just tell guy where and he will be there 24 hours to shit on your doorstep.

Anywhere in the world, he doesn't give a fudge. He's got people who owe him favours.

And airline receipts!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 23135
Nolanator wrote:
That's a neat idea, but a long way from being a practical technology.
Researchers have been investigating MoS2 as a cheap alternative to Pt as a catalyst for hydrogen evolution for a while now (I even have a paper on the topic /globus). MoS2 performs fairly poorly compared to Pt, but it's cheap as chips, so it's trade-off. Using TiO2 provides a photocatalyst which provides the electrons needed to drive the reaction (usually an external voltage does this). That's a nice way of making it a standalone system without being powered.

How you collect the hydrogen is a problem then too. It's going to cost energy to collect and pressurise enough to be of use in a fuel cell.


Nice idea, not really usable. Also, it's not free energy, it's an inefficient conversion process which counters the inefficiency by working all the time. Also, the monolayer MoS2 flakes and TiO2 nanoparticles in the paint aren't exactly cheap.


deadduck wrote:
rabble wrote:
Also pressurizing the hydrogen also energy intensive.

You don't necessarily need to pressurise it if you're using it in real time


You wouldn't be using it in real time. The whole point of water splitting to produce hydrogen is that it's a means to store solar energy for use elsewhere or later. Harvest the sunlight and use that to produce H2, then use that in a fuel cell at a later stage to produce electricity. If you want to use solar energy in real time, then you'd just use a photovoltaic or dye-sensitised solar cell. The greater the number of processes between photons hitting your solar cell and you using the resulting power, the worse the efficiency. Each step costs energy. Generating H2 from photocatalysts and then immediately using it makes no sense at all.


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Posts: 43029
Location: Fighting political correctness with "banter"
Can some fecker email Groucho ffs


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4006
Fat from slime.

https://www.wired.com/story/synthetic-g ... the-future


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31891
Location: in transit
waguser wrote:

Image

:lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 4:58 pm
Posts: 19270
Can I get it in Magnolia? If not, it'll be a disaster.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6916
Location: Vandean Coast
Nolanator wrote:

deadduck wrote:
rabble wrote:
Also pressurizing the hydrogen also energy intensive.

You don't necessarily need to pressurise it if you're using it in real time


You wouldn't be using it in real time. The whole point of water splitting to produce hydrogen is that it's a means to store solar energy for use elsewhere or later. Harvest the sunlight and use that to produce H2, then use that in a fuel cell at a later stage to produce electricity. If you want to use solar energy in real time, then you'd just use a photovoltaic or dye-sensitised solar cell. The greater the number of processes between photons hitting your solar cell and you using the resulting power, the worse the efficiency. Each step costs energy. Generating H2 from photocatalysts and then immediately using it makes no sense at all.



Whilst I don't take issue with anything you've said I think you're overlooking the engineering challenges you're facing with the system you've suggested.
How do you collect the hydrogen off the roof (or somesuch)?
How do you transport the hydrogen to the central fuel cell?
Not storing the hydrogen also eliminates any safety risk as there is no large amount of H2 being stored at any given time
Electricity on the other hand is relatively easy to store

There are tradeoffs to be made, and when the cost of the resource is essentially free, efficiency can be one of them. It seems more likely to me that if, or when, these systems come to market for installing on buildings that they'll be smaller self contained units wired together rather than one massive system integrated into the building. I still don't think they will replace traditional solar panels though.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: akann, Bing [Bot], Bokkom, Boobs not Moobs, booze, Brumby_in_Vic, comets, Crazy Ed, danthefan, earl the beaver, easyray, Fat Old Git, Google Adsense [Bot], Gospel, gurudoright, henry, Jay Cee Gee, jezzer, lorcanoworms, Luciano, Matt Henjak, Mr Mike, obelixtim, Pat the Ex Mat, robmatic, Rocketz, Rugby2023, Saint, Sonny Blount, SublimePlayer, Tehui, theaxe, The Native, troglodiet, True Blue and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group