Bitcoin Forum

electrolyteless water splitting

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acsnano.7b01632

In this article there are no references to scientific studies and no data on the test sample. Perhaps it is only a theory which will never be confirmed empirically. On the Internet many descriptions of such devices, but it's all fake.

It's the second article i read about that.
I can say that rumor was cleared months ago, and yes it's fake. No data to stand it all the way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=Ci6LKz0ajfI
https://www.rmit.edu.au/news/all-news/2017/jun/solar-paint-offers-endless-energy-from-water-vapour

photocatalyst technology
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-solar-material-hydrogen-fuel.html

It's very simple to get hydrogen from water, if you put a batteries terminals, or wires connected to a battery, in water, they will split the water into hydrogen and oxygen. But if you have a metal that splits them then it seems like there would be nothing to segregate the hydrogen and oxygen after they are separated, they might just form back into water again.

Here is about electrolyteless water splitting.

It looks like the same as putting a positive and negative in water except a) involves light/dark vs negative/positive, b) harder to separate the hydrogen and oxygen, c) relies on vapor, which does not seem practical.

"leading to efficient hydrogen and oxygen evolution from water vapor" Where is the efficiency? A vast amount of hydrogen can be contained in a cubic foot of water, but the same amount of vapor would take up quite a bit more space.

It looks like a kind of cool science experiment but hard to see how it would offer a benefit over a solar panel using electricity to split hydrogen from saltwater.  

the price of surface

So what do you do with the products afterward? Do you just burn the hydrogen or do you recombine it with oxygen in a reactor to produce some energy with water as the byproduct?

In any case, the energy used to split the water molecule should be less than the energy you'll get from burning the resulting gases. I may not know chemistry but many have promised to do this and all have failed so far. People say it's just wasteful.

If it's going to used for making fuel for storage though, that might be useful, even if it takes more energy to make than you get from it. If your country have a really wet rainy season, you can use the excess electricity from hydroplants to convert some of the water to fuel. When summer comes and your dams dry out, you resort to burning those fuel.

I remember Audi claiming to have made diesel from water and CO2 years ago. Can't remember if that was an April Fool's joke.

Here is 100% Solar energy and it is virtually for free.

I think that the real devices are already, only we about it are not told. Think, time will come and we know a true. A question is in other, when this time will come.