News from a Clean Hydrogen Fuel Future

Hydrogen Fuel from Non-Food Sources

Tomorrow our vehicles may derive power by enzymes. These enzymes may originate from the cellulose of woodchips or grass and instead of emitting poisonous gases they will exhale hydrogen. We know that when hydrogen is burned, the only emission it makes is water vapor, so a key benefit of hydrogen fuel is that when burned, carbon dioxide (CO2) is not produced. Clearly, hydrogen is less of a pollutant in the air because it omits little tail pipe pollution. Hydrogen also has the potential to run a fuel-cell engine with better effectiveness over an internal combustion engine.
A team of scientists from Virginia Tech, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the University of Georgia says it has successfully generated hydrogen gas. Normally these kinds of fuels are derived from starch. Jonathan Mielenz, who is the leader of the Bioconversion Science and Technology Group at ORNL, says, “It is exciting because using cellulose instead of starch expands the renewable resource for producing hydrogen to include biomass.”

This hydrogen gas is clean enough to power a fuel cell by combining 14 enzymes, one coenzyme, cellulosic materials from non-eatable sources, and water heated to about 90 degrees Fahrenheit (32 C). The researchers utilized cellulosic materials which is isolated from wood chips. But researches also claim that crop waste or switchgrass could also be used for this purpose. These research outcomes are being published in ChemSusChem. The research is supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research; Zhang’s DuPont Young Professor Award, and the U.S. Department of Energy.
Continued Here.

Also -- Hydroxy (HHO) Home Heating Unit Developed

Comments

Ben's Hydrogen said…

That would be a sight to see...a woodchip powered car :) I'm getting very excited about the latest advancements in hydrogen. Things seem like they're starting to really take off.

November 26, 2009 at 12:01 PM

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point: Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo: Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1. Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

Search This Blog