Articles from National Geographic, Reuters, Chemistry World.
I remember watching a video in high school (1988 or so) showing how people could create an oil-like sludge by processing garbage, but is this technique an actual step towards a Mr. Fusion-type source of energy? I know that we here in the US throw out a hell of a lot of organic trash, I hope they find continued success with this research.
Yay Penn State!
Turning poo into hydrogen. I bet that lab smells great.
Interesting… but let me make sure that I understand this. They add a special kind of bacteria to ordinary sewage (or similar biochemicals), then at some point shoot some more electricity into it and collect the hydrogen gas that bubbles to the top.
There were details that they didn’t cover, and I wonder how important those details are. What happens to the initial bacteria when the sewage is zapped? Do they die in the process? Not that I care what happens to individual bacteria, but if the process itself kills them, there needs to be some other place for growing the beasties - presumably the growing can feasibly take place at a faster rate than the killing off?
What other kinds of things do these bacteria produce? What kind of sludge is left over when they’re done? It’s sludge that has some less hydrogen than it had - if I understand this - so is that good or bad? Or niether?
What kind of cages do these beasties need to make sure they won’t go trying to escape? Or are they a common type, so each of us already has millions in our gut already?
So now, we take this hydrogen, bottle if up and… what would be the best way to reclaim the clean energy it “holds”?
I can assure you it has nothing to do with fusion.
Yes, right. I promise that my knowledge of alternate energy physics is not dictated by Back To The Future movies. I meant “Mr. Fusion-like” in the sense that you could dump half a can of flat beer and a banana peel into a gadget, and end up driving x miles down the road on the energy harvested. Or, more in line with the technique as described, when you use the restroom on Greyhound, you get a discounted ticket price. 
OK but did you know that running your Ferrari in reverse will not roll the odometer back?
Allright I won’t be snarky. The first question I have with respect to these articles is “what happens to the carbon during hydrogen production?”
Cellulose is a compound made from hydrogen, oxygen and carbon. If the hydrogen is becoming H[sub]2[/sub] then the carbon has to go somewhere. Unfortunately from, here, it is quite clear that the carbon is being converted to CO[sub]2[/sub]. In otherwords, this source of fuel is no better than biodeisel.
The other peoblem with this is the same as all strategies using hydrogen as fuel. Hydrogen has a low energy density (that’s energy/volume not energy/mass). Even liquified hydrogen has about 1/4 the energy density of gasoline. If we were to run our cars on hydrogen this way, we would be filling up our tanks very frequently.
The solution is to store hydrogen in higher density compounds such as metal hydrides, ammonia, ammonia borane complexes, and even water (No not for electrolysis).
I’m sorry, I’m still mystified by the flat beer comment. Who has flat beer?
I was just watching a special on Discovery or something like that.
A man has built a house. He turns his tap water into all the energy he needs. The solar panels powers the system to turn water into Hydrogen and Oxygen. He stores the hydrogen in tanks outside. Those feed the fuel cells that power his house and his car.
He is doing this today, right now. It’s a hobby for him. It is all off the shelf tech. Sure it’s a pricey shelf but the guy isn’t even hooked up to the power company, and if you built entire developments like this it would be much cheaper.
So, my laymen’s take-away from this is that the CO2 absorbed by the plants as they grow (which are later consumed as food, etc and then later disposed of as waste) counteracts any CO2 produced in the process of harvesting the hydrogen gas. You’d also have to calculate any energy saved when comparing a hydrogen-harvesting waste water system to such a system that does not try and harvest energy from waste.
I realize that having no net increase in C02 emissions is not an ideal solution, but this (along with biodiesel) portends a possible future layer of improved/increased efficiency compared to what we are doing currently, does it not?
Right. Just like with biodeisel, you are taking CO[sub]2[/sub] out of the atmosphere, then putting that same CO[sub]2[/sub] back into it. Minus the fact that the process takes energy to work, and that energy most likely comes from a fossil fuel plant.
On the otherhand, since the CO[sub]2[/sub] is being produced at one location, it may be reasonable to consider sequestering it.
Absolutely, and I don’t mean to sound like its a waste of time and we should throw in the towel. Also, instead of wrestling with running cars on hydrogen, they could simply burn the hydrogen there to produce electric power.
Several small steps can make one big step. One thing you need to be cautious about zero net emmision fuels such as biodeisel, is wastefull use. Just because your hippie mobile runs entirely on biodeisel, does not mean you can leave your car running and race around burning fuel right and left. The more biodeisel you burn, the less biodeisel supply there is, which means that more fossil fuels are needed to make up for the lost supply.
My skeptic meter is pinging. I would love to know his design and plan though, because it sounds like a neat project even if the facts are sketchy.