Though it was some sort of error, but if it possible from that particular combination due simply to chemistry impressive.
The chemistry is not impressive at all. Water and carbon dioxide are the products of hydrocarbon combustion, along with energy. Reversing that process by
putting energy back in (on an industrial scale, as opposed to a laboratory experiment) is certainly an impressive feat of
engineering, but there's nothing special or exciting about the chemistry. (Emphasis added because I guarantee some people are going to misunderstand this point and think this is a source of free energy or free fuel. It isn't. You have to put in more energy to make the fuel than you get by burning it.)
That said I wonder if it would work for space colonies, that said I think the modest Solar Panel doesn't get the props it deserves.
It would work, but what use would a space colony have for hydrocarbon fuel? Hydrocarbon fuels are useful on Earth because they have a high energy density and are easily transported in bulk over vast distances, but a space colony has no need to transport its energy anywhere, except perhaps as rocket fuel, but pure hydrogen has higher specific impulse, which is more important in rocketry than energy density.