New technique creates cheap, abundant hydrogen: report

[lligrd]

Mon Nov 12, 5:12 PM ET

CHICAGO (AFP) - US researchers have developed a method of producing hydrogen gas from biodegradable organic material, potentially providing an abundant source of this clean-burning fuel, according to a study released Monday.

The technology offers a way to cheaply and efficiently generate hydrogen gas from readily available and renewable biomass such as cellulose or glucose, and could be used for powering vehicles, making fertilizer and treating drinking water.

Numerous public transportation systems are moving toward hydrogen-powered engines as an alternative to gasoline, but most hydrogen today is generated from nonrenewable fossil fuels such as natural gas.

The method used by engineers at Pennsylvania State University however combines electron-generating bacteria and a small electrical charge in a microbial fuel cell to produce hydrogen gas.


more> http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071112/sc_afp/ussciencefuel_071112215156;_ylt=AoOFbbbroPADnmEGBNinlg2s0NUE

[lurky]

1. If this pans out, it could be great news.

Hydrogen sounds great, except for the small matter that the only practical way to get it is from fossil fuels. Maybe this can change that.

[lligrd]

2. Yes, Really Exciting

Wondered if anyone else had heard anything about it.

[Dead_Parrot]

3. Dare I ask where the carbon goes?

Or is that anathema?

[drm604]

4. Yes, you dare ask.

It's a perfectly legitimate question. The answer is that, since this waste was generated by recently grown plants (or by animals eating those plants), any carbon released was recently absorbed from the atmosphere so there is no net gain in atmospheric carbon. No new carbon is being added to the atmosphere. This is different from fossil fuels which contain millions of years worth of absorbed carbon and therefore increase the current atmospheric levels when burned.

[NickB79]

9. "No new carbon is added to the atmosphere"

That is true when you take a very narrow view of the system (decomposing garbage to hydrogen is technically carbon-neutral), but that food didn't just magically appear on the grocery store shelves. Massive amounts of fossil fuels were used to farm it, process it, and transport it.

Just remember: we burn 10 calories of petroleum for every calorie of food we eat. Farming is a HUGE source of carbon into the atmosphere.

[skids]

10. So what then, let it rot and turn to methane?

:shrug: Waste to fuel/heat/electricity = good -- waste to landfill and hence to CO2 and methane = bad -- seems like a no-brainer to me. :shrug:

[NickB79]

13. No, no, I fully support burning the methane as fuel

After all, methane has 20X the heat-absorbing potential of CO2. I'm just pointing out that even this energy source comes with large fossil fuel inputs, and is not carbon-neutral overall.

IMO, the better solution in the future would be a) don't waste so much food, and b) work organic matter to compost for fertilizers instead of letting it rot into methane.

[razzleberry]

11. 10 calories for one ... do you have a cite for that?

>Just remember: we burn 10 calories of petroleum for every calorie of food<

you wouldn't guess that from fuel ethanol,
where the GAIN is ten to one

[NickB79]

12. Yep, right here

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/02/0079915

As for ethanol being a gain of 10:1; well, since all fuel ethanol currently made comes from FOOD (an oil INPUT of 10:1), maybe you should run that math again. That explains why the OVERALL (not final production point, like you like to quote) EROEI for ethanol is approximately 1.3:1.

[XemaSab]

5. Nothing about it in the PNAS website yet...

(Almost typed PNAC there! :o)

There is an article on the Penn State website, which included this quote:

"This process produces 288 percent more energy in hydrogen than the electrical energy that is added to the process," says Logan.

http://live.psu.edu/story/27233

There's also this article, which focuses on wastewater treatment applications:

http://live.psu.edu/story/11709

"However, giving the bacteria a small assist with a tiny amount of electricity -- about 0.25 volts or a small fraction of the voltage needed to run a typical 6 volt cell phone -- they can leap over the fermentation barrier and convert a "dead end" fermentation product, acetic acid, into carbon dioxide and hydrogen."

And this:

http://www.engr.psu.edu/ce/enve/H2-Production.htm

"Hydrogen production in fuel cells does not increase CO2 emissions only when the hydrogen is produced from renewable resources, such as water or biomass sources such as high-sugar crops. Because growing these crops captures CO2 in the form of biomass, carbon release during hydrogen production will not produce a net increase in global atmospheric CO2."

[XemaSab]

6. This could be household technology...

If you'd like to try building a MFC yourself, see the Make one! page.

http://www.engr.psu.edu/ce/enve/mfc-Logan_files/mfc-Logan.htm

[Javaman]

7. Once upon a time, about 10 years ago...

I read about this guy that built this hyrdogen cell that ran off of bacteria.

He had it hooked up to his home. He said all it required was to rotate it once a day and he would get hydropower.

The article had several photos and some chemical professors from a local college gave the process the thumbs up.

I never heard a thing about it again.

[tom_paine]

8. If true, this could be the most revolutionary energy process ever.

However, with billions at stake, if true, these researchers are soon to be bought off, discredited, or murdered after taking a "walk in the woods".