Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

Are Solar's Problems Solved?

By Eoin O'Carroll, Christian Science Monitor. Posted August 4, 2008.


MIT researches have come up with a discovery that may help to get over one of solar power's biggest drawbacks: storing energy.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

A big drawback of solar power is that it doesn't work at night or on cloudy days. But researchers at MIT say they now have an inexpensive way to store solar energy when the sun isn't out.

Daniel Nocera, a chemistry professor at MIT, and Matthew Kanan, a postdoctoral fellow in Mr. Nocera's lab, have developed a catalyst made from cobalt and phosphate that can split water into oxygen and hydrogen gas. When used in conjunction with a photovoltaic solar panel, their system can use water to store the sun's energy.

A press release from MIT explains how it works:

The key component in Nocera and Kanan's new process is a new catalyst that produces oxygen gas from water; another catalyst produces valuable hydrogen gas. The new catalyst consists of cobalt metal, phosphate and an electrode, placed in water. When electricity -- whether from a photovoltaic cell, a wind turbine or any other source -- runs through the electrode, the cobalt and phosphate form a thin film on the electrode, and oxygen gas is produced.
Combined with another catalyst, such as platinum, that can produce hydrogen gas from water, the system can duplicate the water splitting reaction that occurs during photosynthesis.
At night, the hydrogen and oxygen can be recombined into a fuel cell to produce a carbon-free electric current that can power your home or charge an electric car.

Wired explains why this system represents a breakthrough:
Solar energy currently makes less than one percent of the world's electricity. The main drawback of the technology, preventing wider adoption, is that solar systems only make power while the sun is shining. At night or on cloudy days, those in need of power must look elsewhere. So storage of electrical energy has been a long-sought after technological advance. Batteries work but they're too big and expensive. Fuels, fossil or renewable, are different: They act as their own storage, allowing for easy transport and usage. That's one reason that coal and oil have such a dominant hold on the world's energy market.
But how much water would it take to power a home? The Guardian suggests that it would be less than a gallon a day:
Converting an Olympic swimming pool of water into hydrogen and oxygen per second would create 43 terawatts of power. "In the next 50 years, the world needs 16 terawatts. By the end of the century, we'll need around 30," said Nocera. "There's a heck of lot of energy stored in chemical bonds."
For a home, Nocera said that it would be enough to split a few litres of water per day into hydrogen and oxygen. The water would be reformed when the gases were put through the fuel cell.
There is much work to be done in converting Nocera's idea into a commercial product. At the moment, his catalyst can only accept small amounts of electrical current at once, meaning that it would be an inefficient way to quickly store large amounts of energy. But Nocera is certain that engineers will iron out the issues and produce commercial-scale products within a decade.
Nocera and Kanan are not the first to come up with a way of splitting water molecules to produce hydrogen and oxygen. The process, known as electrolysis, was discovered as early as 1800. But electrolysis has always required expensive machines using exotic metals or nanoparticles, and it has required the water to be pressurized and heated. Nocera and Kanan's process uses common elements to split room-temperature water.

"This is the nirvana of what we've been talking about for years," said Nocera in the press release. "Solar power has always been a limited, far-off solution. Now we can seriously think about solar power as unlimited and soon."

Scientists don't normally talk like this, and Nocera is not alone in his robust claims. The MIT press release quotes James Barber, a biochemist at Imperial College London who was not involved in this research.

"This is a major discovery with enormous implications for the future prosperity of humankind," he said. "The importance of their discovery cannot be overstated since it opens up the door for developing new technologies for energy production thus reducing our dependence for fossil fuels and addressing the global climate change problem."

(At this point, it's hard not to think of the story in the satirical Onion newspaper titled "Amazing New Hyperbolic Chamber Greatest Invention In The History Of Mankind Ever.")

This is the second time this month that MIT has made headlines with advances in solar technology. Two weeks ago researchers in the university's engineering school announced that they had developed an inexpensive mixture of organic solar concentrating dyes that can be painted on to windows.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: solar power, renewable energy, clean energy, mit, solar energy

Eoin O'Carroll is a blogger for The Christian Science Monitor.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
This looks like the real thing - very exciting!
Posted by: PaulC on Aug 4, 2008 3:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now all we need is the WILL to get it ready for use in the marketplace! But make no mistake, it is precisely innovations such as this, profoundly simple advances that leapfrog current paradigms about electrical generation and storage, that open the spigot for big research and development dollars.

After all, there is so much at stake, not just in terms of what is good for all mankind, but at a much more shallow level of virtually unlimited amounts of money to be made by the investor who puts it all together first!

peace,
Paul

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Article Abstract
Posted by: fanny666 on Aug 4, 2008 3:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In Situ Formation of an Oxygen-Evolving Catalyst in Neutral Water Containing Phosphate and Co2+

I'd be lying if I said I really understand all of this. This is definitely not my field. Any physics people here?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Article Abstract Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: Article Abstract Posted by: fanny666
hopefully, these guys don't end up dead...
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Aug 4, 2008 9:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'cause if they're right, this really will change the world.

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Way Cool!
Posted by: phoolish on Aug 4, 2008 10:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've been dancing around batteries for a long time and I'm tired of their footprint on the planet. I hope it can become readily available to us all - or will Big Corp own the suns rays as well?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Eh?
Posted by: Urgelt on Aug 5, 2008 6:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't exactly see where this so-called "breakthrough" will revolutionize solar power.

It's important to understand that what we are talking about is a kind of electrical battery. Assuming electrolysis ever reaches the market as a battery chemistry for solar power - a generous assumption, in my opinion - it will compete directly with other battery technologies which do not require expensive fuel cells and which do not need to mechanically pressurize hydrogen.

Forgive my skepticism, but I am suspicious that this press release by MIT has more to do with grant applications than commercial solar power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: h? Posted by: arocco
Joe Romm does it again
Posted by: GreyFlcn on Aug 5, 2008 9:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Joseph Romm explodes this press release, and goes over why this is such a silly way to store solar energy.

In short, losing 80% of the electricity that you store is a stupid way to store energy.

And we got far better options that lose less than 20%.

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/8/4/13531/71482

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Romm is correct Posted by: PaulC
M I T development of solar p-v/water electrolysis story incomplete
Posted by: longingfords on Aug 5, 2008 10:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the electrolysis of water to produce hydrogen (we have plenty of free oxygen in air) and sun-produced photo voltaic electric currents are not new or novel. the problem is the storage of hydrogen cheaply.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hydrogen leaks out of anything.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Aug 7, 2008 3:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hydrogen is the smallest atom. A hydrogen
atom can loose its electron to the wall of its
container, leaving just a proton. Since a
proton is 1000 times smaller than a hydrogen
atom, the proton sees huge spaces between the
atoms of the solid container. ANY container
is more of a sponge than a container for
hydrogen.

There are other problems, but I cannot log in
from home any more because Alternet changed
something or "upgraded" something. If I
could log in at home, I would tell you the
rest of the problems with hydrogen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm excited...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Aug 8, 2008 3:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... are you?

JDFU

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement