From: Sam Wormley on
Catalyst Brings Cheap Hydrogen Fuel Closer to Reality
Substance overcomes many of the drawbacks of previous catalysts

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/04/catalyst-brings-cheap-hydrogen-f.html?etoc


Hydrogen sure seems like the perfect alternative to fossil fuels. Just
zap water with a bit of energy to split it into hydrogen and oxygen, and
presto, you�ve wound up with a gas that can be used to power the
planet�and that emits no CO2. Ah, were it only so simple. Conventional
water-splitting catalysts that make hydrogen gas are either too
expensive, too frail, or too finicky to work in water alone.

Now, however, researchers report that they�ve created a new
molybdenum-based catalyst that cranks out the hydrogen, is cheap to
make, works in water, and is robust. The catalyst isn�t perfect, as it
requires too much energy to generate hydrogen. But its unusual character
offers chemists a valuable new lead for making and improving
water-splitting catalysts.
From: JOHN on

"Sam Wormley" <swormley1(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hvqdnesLnsZDdEXWnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d(a)mchsi.com...
> Catalyst Brings Cheap Hydrogen Fuel Closer to Reality
> Substance overcomes many of the drawbacks of previous catalysts
>
> http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/04/catalyst-brings-cheap-hydrogen-f.html?etoc
>
> Hydrogen sure seems like the perfect alternative to fossil fuels. Just zap
> water with a bit of energy to split it into hydrogen and oxygen, and
> presto, you�ve wound up with a gas that can be used to power the
> planet�and that emits no CO2. Ah, were it only so simple. Conventional
> water-splitting catalysts that make hydrogen gas are either too expensive,
> too frail, or too finicky to work in water alone.
>
> Now, however, researchers report that they�ve created a new
> molybdenum-based catalyst that cranks out the hydrogen, is cheap to make,
> works in water, and is robust. The catalyst isn�t perfect, as it requires
> too much energy to generate hydrogen.

WAIT, "....requires too much energy to generate hydrogen....." is wrong.
If it did, the catalyst would get hot, or the water would get hot.
It takes the same amount of energy to generate H from water no matter what
the catalist.
Use Platinum, (cost is high)

The writer of the article does not understand the chemistry or the physics.


>But its unusual character offers chemists a valuable new lead for making
>and improving water-splitting catalysts.


From: Jeroen Belleman on
Sam Wormley wrote:
> Hydrogen sure seems like the perfect alternative to fossil fuels. Just
> zap water with a bit of energy to split it into hydrogen and oxygen, and
> presto, you�ve wound up with a gas that can be used to power the
> planet[...]

Yeah, Right.

Invest a little, reap a lot. This rhetoric is obviously aimed at
Wall street types. It doesn't work here.

Or shouldn't, anyway.

Jeroen Belleman
From: rabid_fan on
On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:31:18 -0500, JOHN wrote:

>
> WAIT, "....requires too much energy to generate hydrogen....." is
> wrong. If it did, the catalyst would get hot, or the water would get
> hot. It takes the same amount of energy to generate H from water no
> matter what the catalist.
>

You are confusing thermodynamics and kinetics.

Thermodynamically, the difference between the chemical potential
energy of the reactant, water, and the products, hydrogen and
oxygen, is always the same.

However, the job of a catalyst is to lower the activation
energy of the reaction, and this is a kinetic phenomenon.
The activation energy depends on the particular configuration
changes (bond stretching, rotations, etc) that occur during
the transformation of reactants to products. Activation
energy determines the rate of reaction and is most likely
the reference within the article.

But the article is vague, imprecise, and poorly written.
Science Magazine should not be a primary source of information
for serious physicists.