Talk:Hydrogen production

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Environment (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Energy  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

This material originated from the article Hydrogen economy. KarenAnn 17:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Nano-technology[edit]

this is quite incorrect and needs deletion or serius change, if aluminum is consumed it is not catalyst and whole process is just usual chemical reaction. it is impossible to generate hydrogen with any catalyst without temperature gradient because that violates laws of thermodynamic. also same effect can be achieved using aluminum amalgam instead of nanoparticles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.61.66.75 (talk) 22:37, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Disposal of the Leftover Aluminium hydroxide Al(OH)3[edit]

In the "chemical production" section it shows the overall equation Al + H2O → Al(OH)3 + 3H2. Does anyone know what they do with the leftover Aluminium hydroxide? Armadillo1985 (talk) 04:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC) Melt it, then electrolyze back to aluminium or throw out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.61.66.75 (talk) 22:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

About the "Chemical production" section[edit]

Normally one who talks about Hydrogen production refers to the process of generating hydrogen in large quantities so that it could meet the need of industrial practices, but this "chemical production" mainly introduces a storage method of hydrogen. I understand it is actually the process of hydrogen production, but isn't it a bit different from other methods? Like using bacteria, heat or electricity? I mean maybe it is better to be put in another category. Dcbayer04 (talk) 12:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

the part about hydrogen storage is removed, the same section is on hydrogen storage - metal hydrides. Mion (talk) 13:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Someone has done some good work on this page.[edit]

Well organized! That's what a Table of Contents should look like ideally. Maybe a Conclusion section would be good. Just a few sentences summing it up. KarenAnn 00:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

"Water purification"[edit]

Water purification is not a method of hydrogen production. I've deleted again. --Pjacobi 18:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC) I fixed the category text:

The following articles relate to or are required for the production of hydrogen.. reg. Mion 20:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

And you have to purify the water.Mion 20:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

"Water purification" was listwed as a method of hydrogen production. This was and is still wrong. You cannot produce hydrogen by purifying water. Mion I must severely doubt your qualification for the project you try to do here. --Pjacobi 07:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I didn.t say it is a method, but if you talk about hydrogen production from water the first step is the purification of water.Mion 08:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

The first step in most chemical synthesis is purification of the starting materials. But it's rarely mentioned. And it's not always necessary. Hydrogen can be made from seawater. In fact, in electrolysis, it's necessary to use impure water. Give it up. SBHarris 08:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

yes, for conductivity, but certain elements have to be removed, i think its better to include when waterpurification is used and when not, and where is the section about hydrogen purification ? Mion 08:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

The waterpurification should be under electrolysis tp prevent the misconception that it is a method. Mion 08:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Photoelectrochemical cell[edit]

Photoelectrochemical cell.Mion 04:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

argon[edit]

I have heard of using surface uranium for extraction. I am sorry but i dont remember where, but the idea was that if you found an area with high amounts of radon, you would be able to extract hydrogen from water due to nuclear decay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.78.78.201 (talk) 02:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Aluminum-Gallium pellets produce hydrogen from water on contact[edit]

As I already mentioned in Talk:Hydrogen_economy, Jerry Woodall, a researcher in Purdue Discovery Park, has made an interesting discovery. The article describes a chemical process in which water reacts with aluminum, the latter effectively stripping water molecules of their oxygen and freeing hydrogen. The gallium prevents formation of aluminum oxide film which would stop the continuous reaction. The reaction takes place until either aluminum or water runs out. More informative description of the process can be found in a Flash-based presentation Woodall has compiled. Does anyone have more information and any thoughts if this should be included in the article? --Khokkanen 19:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

that seems to be spinof of old technology of aluminium mercury amalgam which I saw on some very old chemistry book.

and now someone put that in the nanotecnolody section as another method. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.61.66.75 (talk) 22:40, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

John Kanzius[edit]

The folks discussing John Kanzius are proposing that content be merged into Hydrogen_production.

The problem here is that it is not clear what Kanzius is claiming.

Is he or is he not claiming that he gets more energy out than the RF input?

If yes: then it appears a water as fuel proposal

If no: then he is apparently claming a highly efficient method of producing hydrogen.

Which is it?

Kaznius himself is not making any public comments, he does not even have a web site. The statements reported and attributed to him have been contradictory.

Meanwhile, his strongest supporter so far, Dr. Rustum Roy, states (as of 13th Sept 2007):

"He has not made any attempt as far as we know to obtain the data regarding the energy balance between input and output." http://www.rustumroy.com/response_to_email.htm

The problem here is complete absence of data on the input and output energy numbers for the process. It is puzzling as to why this is being kept so secret..... I can understand secrecy about HOW it is done, but secrecy as to WHAT has been done makes no sense. Charles 15:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I oppose the merge. See Talk:John_Kanzius#Problem_with_merge_proposal ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

according to experiment video he simply made plasma flame using rf energy source. there is no any hydrogen collencted anywhere. if he at least could collnet hydrogen intead of igniting it then it could be at least soem way of production, but once he cannot store it that is not "production" in any case —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.61.66.75 (talk) 20:16, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

"Nanoparticles could make hydrogen cheaper than gasoline"[edit]

From the article:

"the coatings can be used to retrofit existing electrolysers to increase their efficiency to 85 percent--exceeding the Department of Energy's goal for 2010 by 10 percent"
"Instead of switching 170,000 gas stations over to hydrogen, using our electrodes could enable consumers to make their own hydrogen, either in the garage or right on the vehicle"

Gettin' a date[edit]

What year was hydrogen first produced on an industrial scale? By who? Trekphiler (talk) 19:25, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

It should be close to 1823, see Döbereiner's lamp, Mion (talk) 20:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Hydrogen production from metals and acids[edit]

Why doesn't this page mention anything about hydrogen being obtained by reacting metals and acids? metal + acid = salt + hydrogen

220.253.62.89 (talk) 15:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Photo-Chemical Splitting of Water[edit]

Does anyone know about photo-chemical splitting of water? Basically, the reaction happens you mix a transition-metal catalyst with water and shine light on the solution. I vaguely remember hearing them talk about using Rhodium or Rutherfordium but I'm not sure.

I'll start doing some research myself in case no one else has heard of it. Here is an example [1] of what I'm talking about: Armadillo1985 (talk) 06:45, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

A Hydrogen Production Breakthrough[edit]

A Hydrogen Production Breakthrough [January 27, 2009 |

http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newenergyandfuel/com/2009/01/27/a-hydrogen-production-breakthrough/

A. Welford Castleman Jr., Eberly Family Distinguished Chair in Science and Evan Pugh Professor in the Penn State Departments of Chemistry and Physics and Penn State graduate students Patrick Roach and Hunter Woodward and Virginia Commonwealth University Professor of Physics Shiv Khanna and postdoctoral associate Arthur Reber announced a discovery to produce hydrogen from water by exposing selected active sites of aluminum atoms on a nanoscaled aluminum cluster.

The study paper was published in the 23 January 2009 issue of the journal Science and was funded and supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research.

Mike D (talk) 15:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Steam iron process[edit]

Can someone write what the "Steam-iron" process for producing hydrogen is? It's probably one of the things already listed in the article, just not referenced by that name. 146.115.34.7 (talk) 10:52, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

See 1784 on Timeline of hydrogen technologies, the article iron-steam process isn't written yet, but it contains some reading. Mion (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC), and no, its not yet in the article, the successors are the Lane hydrogen producer and steam reforming. Mion (talk) 20:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Relatedly, can someone write (or reference the best theory) of how hydrogen vents in Iceland produce hydrogen? 146.115.34.7 (talk) 10:52, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The steam is used in Iceland to produce electricity which is used for the electrolysis of water, see geothermal power [2] and [3]. Mion (talk) 20:34, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Or do you mean this news [4], pag 2 ? Magma and water, but then, the hydrogen is not only contaminated with sulfur. Mion (talk) 20:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Methods of production[edit]

Synthetic biology too is coming up with hydrogen production methods. However, at present it has not yet produced a viable organic hydrogen generator. [1][2][3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.167.92 (talk) 10:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

add in article

Fuel reforming[edit]

it is stated that hydrogen can also be made by reforming fuel. This is also possible on-board of vehicles. Not sure whether there are emissions; think so

see http://www.h2net.org.uk/PDFs/RN_1/HydrogenMLW.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.162.118 (talk) 09:08, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Decomposition_of_Water_by_Radiowaves[edit]

I added this in the 'From water' - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_production#Decomposition_of_Water_by_Radiowaves. Please review. Could not find reviews of the efficiency, doubtful if any have been published yet. Regardless of efficiency, it seems to work, at least in North America. Could not obtain a copy of http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=4651925 - they seemed successful, but hard to say from the abstract if its related. Casimirpo (talk) 01:51, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

This is definetely hoax because no hydrogen is stored. in best case it can fall under thermal dissociation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.61.66.75 (talk) 22:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

There is no requirement to be stored, if hydrogen is produced, thats it, as it was removed in the last clean out, i'll put the section here for reinclusion (or not), the section has been part of debate on Talk:John Kanzius. Mion (talk) 23:02, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
There seems to be literature on the subject proving its not a hoax. See Penn State ref. As unsigned could have noted if they weren't so busy sniping. I request undo - not only is this novel, it is important. Casimirpo (talk) 18:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Decomposition of water by radiowaves[edit]

Using radiofrequency radiation it is possible to produce hydrogen from water-salt solutions (NaCl-H20) and seawater by chemical decomposition.

When exposed to a polarized radiofrequency beam at 13.56 MHz at room temperature, NaCl–H2O solutions of concentrations ranging from 1 to 30% generate an intimate mixture of hydrogen and oxygen.

Radiofrequency radiation makes sodium ions in saltwater-solution vibrate, and due to van der Waals force the oxygen atoms of water molecules will also vibrate, resulting in separation of hydrogen and oxygen atoms.

Whether this novel method is economically competitive is yet to be resolved. This method of separating hydrogen and oxygen from water was discovered in 2007 by John Kanzius experimenting with water desalinization, and it was first confirmed by Penn State research group lead by Professor Rustum Roy.Observations of polarised RF radiation catalysis of dissociation of H2O–NaCl solutions, R. Roy, M. L. Rao and J. Kanzius, originally published in Materials Research Innovations, 12, 3-6.Salt water burning video by WKYC-TV September 2007 at Penn State University

It has long been known that with sufficient energy, water dissociates into its constituents. That having been said, I dont know about the usefulness of RF-induced dissociation. As pointed out elsewhere, there is little interest in generating a mixture of H2 and O2. The goal is separate streams of each. By the way, Materials Research Innovations is a journal edited by Rustum Roy. By publishing his paper in his own journal, Roy has undercut the significance of the results.--Smokefoot (talk) 19:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Whether *you* know about the usefulness is not relevant to encyclopedic articles, so your argument is lost here. And if you had even superficially bothered to study the subject, you would know its not a just water-oxygen mixture. Your point about Material Research Innovations is valid in terms of peer review, though, but not in terms of significance of the results. Casimirpo (talk) 06:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps Smokefoot is referring to something like this: Operating a radio-frequency plasma source on water vapor, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 80, 083503 (2009), Sonca V. T. Nguyen et al. [5] Ie. production of hydrogen with via rf. Note that Kanzius's discovery doesn't require plasma to be present, and it wont be until the gases are ignited. Which seems to serve as a obfuscation as to what the reaction is. Casimirpo (talk) 06:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
My points are
  • an admittedly snarky aspect: when 80-year old retired professors publish in their own journal, one needs to be extremely suspicious of the value of the work.
  • On the technical points that you raise, there is probably less interest in producing a mixture of H2 and O2 (an energy intensive and potentially dangerous gas separation step seems then to be required).
  • The standard literature on H2 production does not mention RF work. The implication is that RF work is not of much practical value. I encourage folks to consult this literature. I can provide such if you need the material but you need on-line access.
My overall concern is to keep the encyclopedic nature of the article focused on real technologies vs "new age" stuff. We dont want to delude readers into thinking that some huge breakthrough is underway. Such speculation is a form of WP:OR, which is discouraged. Wikipedia occasionally is targeted with fringe science, so I am skeptical. --Smokefoot (talk) 14:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
As long as this dialogue is followed through. There have so far been 3 references in academic literature as to dissociating water (solid or vapor) to produce hydrogen with RF here. Yes, one of the papers was from the Penn State University professor, on materials research and water science (from memory). I dont see why this would be snarky, as he would be expected to be quite an expert. Your point about H2-O2-gas-mixture being produced is kind of valid in respect to Kanzius's particular method - but if you consider the actual process, there's also chlorine and sodium. Your point about "new age" lacks evidence - best to study first and label afterwards. To stress this, note there haven't been any net energy production claims. Perhaps your concerns about fringe science should be directed to Penn State Uni, then? Casimirpo (talk) 17:25, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I did some reading. Indeed, Kanzius/Roy docs are somewhat WP: OR/SECONDARY, and Ngyuen, Akulov etc are somewhat exotic. In the "industrial production" context. So - nevermind! Casimirpo (talk) 17:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Production methods[edit]

Here are the mehtods listed by Ullmann's Encyclopedia, which tends to be very thorough: 4.1. Production from Coal and Hydrocarbons 4.2. Electrolysis 4.3. Thermochemical Water Cleavage 4.4. Other Methods for the Cleavage of Water What is missing in terms of methods that are really useful is the oxidation of hydrocarbons. Heavy residua containing lots of sulfur are oxidized to give H2.

The large section about Al being a hydrogen source is misleading and the length and referencing is disproportionate. I feel bad just throwing that part away, but it is nearly criminal to suggest that Al is a source of H2.--Smokefoot (talk) 23:41, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Aldo right, other encyclopedias use old school classification, current work and classification is at http://www.nrel.gov/hydrogen/proj_production_delivery.html, about AI, if it grows to big we split it out to a new article, it would be funny to remove knowledge to keep the sections small. and yes, the AI section needs to be more clear. Mion (talk) 23:56, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
One problem is that the Al section relies on primary citations (see WP:sources). I will try to find a review or textbook that summarizes that area and replace these references with something more general and more reliable. The second problem is that the Al + NaOH reaction is not a production method in the usual meaning of the term (and article title). Even some other readers complain above about its inclusion. Otherwise, this article becomes a summary of all reactions that yield H2. E.g. one long paragraph per reactive metal, a large section on thermal cracking in petrochemicals, a large section on formic, etc. etc. A book in other words. By the way, thank you for your contributions.--Smokefoot (talk) 01:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
I think the original version also stated that the aluminium was consumed in the process, however if it is a two step process with recovery there is little problem with it, for me, I would welcome every extension of the 350+ thermochemical cycles as that information is currently locked in a database. And, your welcome, i'm sorry i can't contribute more to the article. Mion (talk) 03:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Also, the first part of Chemical production belongs to a new section History, maybe filled with similar information from [[6] :) Mion (talk) 04:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

ARPA-E[edit]

How does this project work: http://arpa-e.energy.gov/FundedProjects.aspx (ARPA-E Affordable Energy from Water and Sunlight project) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.176.8.225 (talk) 10:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Stupid Question (maybe)[edit]

Under Chemical production, we see this: "(1) Al + 3 H2O + NaOH → NaAl(OH)4 + 1.5 H2 (2) NaAl(OH)4 → NaOH + Al(OH)3 "

This may be an extremely stupid question, but shouldn't a truely balanced equation not have a fractional coefficient? And also, when you have 3H2O on the left, doesn't that mean that it will result in 6 hydrogens on the right, therefore a coefficient of 3? And also, we've somehow gone from having only one hydroxide(OH) on the left to having 4 on the right - how? (this is all for the 1st equation)

Again, possibly a stupid question - it's been years since I took chemistry. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.170.51 (talk) 02:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Merge Water splitting[edit]

See Talk:Water_splitting#merge. Mion (talk) 22:55, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Solar reactor[edit]

Perhaps that, besides Daniel Nocera's system, the solar reactor too could be mentioned

91.182.139.124 (talk) 14:42, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^ Synthetic biology and hydrogen
  2. ^ Synthetic biology to make hydrogen
  3. ^ Synthetic biology at Berkeley Lab