Hydrogen and Oxygen from Electricity and Water

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a dual-mode fuel cell developed by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory that can generate electricity from hydrogen and oxygen and also produce these gases from electricity and water. Participants explore the implications, efficiency, and technological aspects of this system, while addressing misconceptions and clarifying its functionality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants highlight the fuel cell's ability to operate in both directions, producing electricity and generating hydrogen and oxygen, suggesting it is a significant technological advancement.
  • Others express skepticism, arguing that the energy output from burning hydrogen and oxygen cannot exceed the energy input required to produce them from water.
  • A participant clarifies that the original poster is not suggesting a perpetual motion machine, but rather a system that is nearly reversible.
  • Concerns are raised about the efficiency of the system, noting that it must be periodically recharged and cannot achieve 100% efficiency due to the second law of thermodynamics.
  • Some participants discuss the potential resistance from large energy companies to the adoption of regenerative fuel cell technologies, suggesting that these companies may prefer traditional hydrogen fuel systems.
  • Questions are posed regarding the specific advantages of this fuel cell compared to conventional fuel cells, with some participants noting its integration of two technologies into a single, lighter system.
  • There is mention of the device being a type of "water battery," with discussions about its energy-to-weight ratio and its applications.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of viewpoints, with some supporting the technology's potential and others questioning its feasibility and efficiency. No consensus is reached regarding the implications of the technology or its comparison to traditional fuel cells.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the need for further research and clarification on the technology's efficiency and practical applications. There are unresolved questions about the specific differences between this fuel cell and standard fuel cells.

Silvershadow
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I came across an amazing fuel cell created by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. It's actually called a http://www.llnl.gov/IPandC/technology/profile/transportation/UnitizedRegenerativeFuelCell/index.php which has a duel mode. Not only can it produce electricity from oxygen and hydrogen (two very abundant and easily available molecules) which is amazing in itself, but it is also reversible so can produce hydrogen and oxygen from electricity and water. Cool huh.
They've also developed the MOST POWERFUL SOLID STATE LAZER which is the stuff of bond movies. They've already developed a proto that after a 6-second shot of laser light produced a 1-centimeter hole in a 2-centimeter-thick slice of steel. If I were a bond villain this company would definitely be on my books!

Silvershadow
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
This belongs in a Bond film. Or maybe Austin Powers, because it's a bunch of goofy crap. You can't get more electricity out of burning hydrogen and oxygen than it takes to make it from water.

But you probably already knew that.
 
I don't think he's suggesting it's a perpetual motion machine, only that it's (nearly) reversible.

- Warren
 
The concept is real. The science is real. The cell must be rejuvenated on occasion ( by recharging water /electricity) as no system can be 100% efficient or fight the 2nd law.

I have trod this path on 3 different forums and have gotten the "woo-woo" response at the start of thread and pregnant silence at the end. Do the research first , then scoff.

The leading opponents are the large energy ( oil/electric ) company's to whom a regenerative fuel cell represents a departure from the daily dependence on their product. The are trying ( with concerted effort , such as the availability of research dollars to "directed projects)to preempt efforts of a self renewing resource by trying to direct the field to adopt fuel cell technologies that rely on using hydrogen as a "fuel" rather then a occasional replenished catalyst.

Research befor you opine..
 
So what does this do that's different from a normal fuel cell?

- Warren
 
Originally posted by chroot
So what does this do that's different from a normal fuel cell?

- Warren

Doesn't really say much on the given link, but it looks like they've licked two different transport problems with a single electrode-electrolyte configuration --- not trivial.
 
Yeah, it's a PEM that can be run in reverse. Essentially, it's a "water battery." Pretty nifty, particularly if what they claim about the energy-to-weight ratio is true.

I don't think anyone is woo-wooing your link, TillEulenspiegel. I think Chemicalsuperfreak mistakenly thought you were suggesting it was a "perpetual energy source," though I can't speak for him.

- Warren
 
Having read the postings and given link, this device does exactly what it says. It combines two related technologies into one package, reducing the overall weight of a system that would otherwise require both and, collectively, heavier separate units.
No perpetual anything. Just an engineering systems-intergration affording weight reduction; useful in special applications noted in the article.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 96 ·
4
Replies
96
Views
14K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
11K