'Major discovery' from MIT primed to unleash solar power revolution »
Posted By capn_caveman 11 months, 1 week ago in Science & TechnologyIn a revolutionary leap that could transform solar power from a marginal, boutique alternative into a mainstream energy source, MIT researchers have overcome a major barrier to large-scale solar power: storing energy for use when the sun doesn't shine.
Read Full Story at web.mit.edu »
6870 Views Share Story 26 Comments Report
Submitted By:
capn_caveman
I'm an engineer that loves 'anything' science. I'm interested in physics, astronomy, space exploration, Earth sciences, and mathematics to name just a few ...
Other Related Articles:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 72 (view all)
-
-
100%
UnusualSuspect11 months, 1 week ago
"Sunlight has the greatest potential of any power source to solve the world's energy problems, said Nocera. In one hour, enough sunlight strikes the Earth to provide the entire planet's energy needs for one year.
James Barber, a leader in the study of photosynthesis who was not involved in this research, called the discovery by Nocera and Kanan a "giant leap" toward generating clean, carbon-free energy on a massive scale."
Excellent news...maybe before I die we can substantially reduce the use of oil and gasoline!
Reply -
-
-
100%
Gransater11 months, 1 week ago
If true, something that can make us free from the yoke of hydrocarbons, and yet, this is the first I'd heard about it. Why is it that things that have the capacity to change life as we know it, hardly gets discussed, or, for that matter, hardly gets noticed by people and also the so called major media?
Reply -
-
-
100%
bill-smith11 months, 1 week ago
This is certainly good news. I really, REALLY hope that this application is commercially viable and that in the not too distant future practicable for the average person/home.
Reply -
25%
BB6411 months, 1 week ago
I don't want to pee in anyone's cornflakes but I don't trust this revolutionary solution. We've had this concept for some time. It's the basis of one of the EU hydrogen fuel cells. Like Cold Fusion, I'll wait until they actually produce a repeatable solution. I see trillions being spent, like in the ethanol plants with very little return when you consider the investment of time, money and energy. Splitting water molecules isn't that simple nor energy efficient. If this is so revolutionary, I would recommend having private industry handling the funding. If private funding isn't available, let MIT spend some of their billions from the endowments.
Again, if it works, I'll be their loudest cheerleader. If this turns out to be one of those typical lefty solutions that never work, I'll make sure you all know it. I work with power gen and simply don't trust this.
Reply-
100%
capn_caveman11 months, 1 week ago
Your skepticism is duly noted, however I must remark on your point about splitting hydrogen from water being an inefficient process. As I see it, the efficiency of the hydrogen generation process really would only impact the initial investment because the energy input to the process is unlimited and free. The efficiency would impact the required size of the installed solar panels that were providing the input to the process. Larger solar panels would be needed for a hydrogen generating process that is highly inefficient and vice versa. One can imagine there would be a breaking point as to where it would be too cost prohibitive to purchase solar cells large enough to accommodate an inefficient process. Whether this process can produce the energy requirements of an average consumer at an initial investment cost that is affordable to the masses remains to be seen. But the research sounds promising overall and in the future the costs of manufacturing solar cells will inevitably decline. We may not see this in 10 years, but I think it's very possible I'll see this type of power generation become available to the masses within my lifetime.
Reply -
100%
Will131311 months, 1 week ago
I see trillions being spent, like in the ethanol plants with very little return when you consider the investment of time, money and energy. Splitting water molecules isn't that simple nor energy efficient. If this is so revolutionary, I would recommend having private industry handling the funding. If private funding isn't available, let MIT spend some of their billions from the endowments.
----
that's very selfish of you since you're a big proponent of coal to gas... which CARTER PUT BILLIONS OF TAX PAYER DOLLARS INTO RESEARCH.....
what's the matter don't want to get put out of business...
Reply -
100%
quackpot11 months, 1 week ago
I believe that you are wong on this issue, BB64. This article is about the development of a catalyst that lowers the activation energy of electrolysis. The concept of a catalyst may not be new (plants that do photosynthesis have had one since prehistory) but having one that actually seems to work is new.
Reply
It should be clear to anyone that multiple forms of energy production coupled to GREATLY more efficient energy use are going to be critical to our economy in the next few decades. Anybody that proposes to remain in the horse and buggy era will not survive.
In the mean time, a focus on wise energy USE will do FAR more to reduce our dependence on foreign oil than any of the drilling schemes that have been proposed. Why waste our resources on inefficient transport (SUVs), poorly insulated buildings, irrational thermostat settings and all of the other purely wasteful uses of the resources.
Better hop on board the new energy train, BB64; it is coming.
-
-
33%
capecoralM11 months, 1 week ago
Sounds promising. Unfortunately the article included this nonsense: Ernst Chain Professor of Biochemistry at Imperial College London. "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."
Reply -
-
100%
miklkit11 months, 1 week ago
From the article:
The success of the Nocera lab shows the impact of a mixture of funding sources - governments, philanthropy, and industry. This project was funded by the National Science Foundation and by the Chesonis Family Foundation, which gave MIT $10 million this spring to launch the Solar Revolution Project, with a goal to make the large scale deployment of solar energy within 10 years.
Reply -
0%
BenO5611 months, 1 week ago
I have to say that this announcement doesn't convince me that widespread solar energy use is about to happen. The major roadblock for solar power use is not storing the energy collected, but the range of sunlight used to generate electricity. Currently, only a small fraction of the sunlight hitting a solar cell is converted - something like 15-20%. Also, if I understood the article, this method uses fresh water in the storage process - another commodity that seems to be headed for shortages.
Reply -
25%
TonyByron11 months, 1 week ago
This story is a steaming load of hyperbole.
Reply
FTA: " Until now, solar power has been a daytime-only energy source, because storing extra solar energy for later use is prohibitively expensive and grossly inefficient. With today's announcement, MIT researchers have hit upon a simple, inexpensive, highly efficient process for storing solar energy."
Pure BS in several ways.
1-Batteries are not "prohibitively expensive" nor are they "grossly inefficient". The electrolysis tank, compressors and separate storage tanks for compressed hydrogen and oxygen and a hydrogen fuel cell are "prohibitively expensive".
2-Adding the additional amount of PV cells necessary to power the electrolysis, compressors and electronics is "prohibitively expensive".
3-Producing hydrogen and oxygen through solar-powered electrolysis is not "highly efficient". -
-
-
0%
ind0611 months, 1 week ago
"Sounds like there are too many moving parts for any type of mobile or cheap application."
Reply
Hmmm....
Are you speaking of solar power, or are you talking about the auto-mobile? Because if you're taking about an auto-mobile, I absolutely agree, too many moving parts to make it mobile or cheap!
-
-
100%
Eagle_Eye11 months, 1 week ago
I think it is the best thing for humans to invest in this type of energy for the future. At least we know the sun is a constant (until it explodes), being able to harness and store it's energy is a wonderful advancement.
Reply
I like this: "Requiring nothing but abundant, non-toxic natural materials, this discovery could unlock the most potent, carbon-free energy source of all: the sun. "This is the nirvana of what we've been talking about for years," especially the non-toxic natural materials. -
0%
willottica11 months, 1 week ago
The use of solar seems great, but one niggling question always comes into my mind. The Earth currently gets a fairly constant amount of sun. If we start to prevent the sun from hitting the earth (necessary in order to capture it), what effect will that have on global temperatures?
Reply
I've never seen any scientific discussion on the heating effects of the sun on the Earth's crust, and while the effect may be small, all of nature is in a delicate equilibrium. If the heating of the Earth is reduced by even 1/100th of a percent, without somehow compensating for this lost heat, over time, it could translate into a significant cooling effect.
The same argument can be made for wind power. (And again, I've never seen it enter a scientific discussion of the subject). The majority of the Earth's winds are blowing in the same direction. By Newton's Third Law: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, each of those windmills will be pushing against the rotation of the earth, and though the force may seem insignificant, it is not nothing. Over time, with nothing to compensate for this force, it will affect the equilibrium that keeps the Earth spinning.
Hell, maybe I should do a doctoral thesis on the adverse environmental effects of Solar and Wind power. You can never get "something for nothing".-
0%
willottica11 months, 1 week ago
I didn't edit this at all, except to test the edit button. Yay edit!
Reply
I would guess that wind power would be one of the most detrimental energy sources there is. It's a direct conversion of the kinetic energy of the earth's rotation into non-kinetic energy (assuming a balance of east-west human activity) this energy, however it is used, has the majority of its losses converted to heat. Solar would reduce the direct heat energy reaching the planet, but this would be replaced largely by energy use being converted (finally) into heat. The potential energy in fossil fuels is also eventually converted to heat, but potential energy doesn't really exist until it is used, so it's not really doing anything but decreasing future potential (and it's quite possible that heat energy somehow gets stored back into potential energy). Would anything restore the rotational kinetic energy of the planet, though? That is exactly what is being used to "create" wind power. -
100%
Tangent00111 months, 1 week ago
"If we start to prevent the sun from hitting the earth (necessary in order to capture it), what effect will that have on global temperatures?"
Reply
Actually, jet contrails do more to reflect the sun's rays than even multiple large solar farms could ever do. There is always an excess of solar energy, with a large portion of it simply reflected back out into space.
You argument about wind doesn't hold water. If blocking the wind would somehow slow down the Earth's rotation, it would have done so by now simply by the existence of big trees. The weather rotates with the Earth, so a hurricane doesn't move because the Earth is 'sliding under it'.
-
-
100%
Cityslicker11 months, 1 week ago
Sounds great , but Cobalt is toxic and Platinum is expensive .
Reply
Other than that sounds good ! -
0%
Nowalive11 months, 1 week ago
Check out my submission on cheap solar cells.
Reply
http://www.homestead.org/ChrisDevaney/NanosolarCells/SolarCells.htm
This would go great with improved storage. Of course Seattle will still be without power for all but about 10 days a year. Oh, and England too. -
0%
Nowalive11 months, 1 week ago
I would like to invite you all to visit my web site and read what I have been saying for well over a year now. I wish this were the old netscape/propeller so that you could read my past suggestions and comments regarding this issue.
Reply
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.