Nanosilicon Rapidly Splits Water Without Light, Heat, or Electricity

Finally a car that really does run on water, now watch we'll have a water shortage....

Is that your car, way out there?

Okay, pretty cool.

Is there some practical application for "just add water" hydrogen generation technology?

Only if you live in the desert.

Well it could make for some long lasting batteries.....

"According to a report in the Huffington Post - Apple's newest move to better the pack is to adopt the hydrogen fuel cell technology being developed for cars and military applications for computer, phone and other battery uses.

Reportedly, the batteries could last weeks and be "more green"."

This brings back the whole dilemma about free/cheap unlimited energy.

Question...what do humans do with an unlimited supply? They use it without limit!

Result...even if the energy comes cheap it still produces heat as a byproduct and waste. Unless the generation of hydrogen in this process absorbs heat we will have a huge net gain in the heat load on the Earth.

With unlimited energy use the waste heat from every energy using process will upset the balance the Earth has with the solar environment. Right now, at the rate we are using fossil fuels there is a net increase of heat. It may or may not be significant in relation to the heat load provided by the sun but given unlimited cheap energy I would hazard a guess that it the heat load will be more significant.

What we need as a species is more efficient use of energy, processes that result in less waste heat.

You worry about using up all the water? What will happen when significant quantities of water are vaporized by a warming planet? (after the devastation caused by the warming!)

Drew K

What a worry wart! I can't imagine ANY of that happening, because that is NOT the way the world works.

Money makes the world go-round, and if government, or industry gets wind that the masses have excess money from savings in one area, then ANY money we might have saved in one area, is promptly pounced on with higher taxes, and higher prices; so, you can rest assured that no industrial boom is going to "heat up the world", if the money isn't there to fuel it. (Pun intended). Besides that, at the moment the 'forces that be' are so anti capitalism that no boom of any sort is on the horizon for quite some time to come! You also rest assured, that government will not tolerate any loss of tax revenue from ANY source, so getting the price down to the point, which would make 'run away' energy consumption possible is not even a logical option at this point.

Even if the energy was FREE to the distributor, it would still cost us consumers a significant portion of our income. Probably nothing less than it costs us now. Probably more because they have all the expense of switching over to a new paradigm. Even buying the devices to produce our own energy will cost so much it will require it's own mortgage to produce, install, and maintain. AND, IF that company dares to acquire any Government subsidy it will die in short order anyway; and, we will be forced to go back to the status quo, so what is all the hand wringing about?

I don't really think having nearly unlimited very cheap energy would be such a bad problem to have. I also don't think we will ever get an opportunity to battle such a frightful scourge.

.

It massive amounts of cheap energy was available, I'm sure we could work out a way to transfer heat off the planet, or decrease heat transfer to the planet. Sure it would require massive amounts of energy, but that is one thing not in short supply in this purely theoretical dilemma. Right?

.

True, I hadn't thought of it that way. It is tough to get rid of low quality heat though. If you could concentrate it into a form that would make it dense enough to get off the planet then you might as well use it to do some work.

It is interesting to think about how to ship low grade energy off planet.

Drew K

I'll confess, my mind boggles at that - too ignorant to imagine more than 'drawing a blank'!!

I found myself wondering about the dynamics of a world where nanosilicon was found in nature (as afaict from reading it isn't here - nanosilica yes, nanosilicon no). It would have to be found somewhere where it never rains, or obviously.... it would be all used up and wasted early on in the planet's history (no doubt in a dramatic manner we'd love to see on YouTube but not experience in person).

If water is scarce enough for a nanosilicon natural resource, and the native life is intelligent, I suppose precious water could also be recovered after energy generation process. If a world existed where water is scarce enough for nanosilicon to be a mined resource, the culture of water appreciation would be pretty extreme, and life would be pretty restricted. Just for life to exist on such a world, you would need a water environment of some kind, but no rain. Maybe underground rivers or so?

Given power and tech for space travel, wet Earth would look like a bit of a plum, I reckon.

_{nanosilicon world invaders, the movie....}

It would definitely be easier to regulate heat by decreasing a portion of the incoming solar radiation at higher latitudes with some sort of space parasol screening the Arctic and Antarctic

.

One way to ship some of the low grade heat off the planet would be to retrofit major low grade heat sources in a given area to reject heat to well insulated heat pipes (heat pipes for high heat transfer, but also to act as a thermal diode). The heat pipes would transfer heat up very tall towers that support to massive radiators/thermal antennas positioned to radiate into cold dark space. An actively positioned reflector would be needed to shield the heat rejection radiators from incident solar radiation.

.

A good portion of the heat would not exit the atmosphere, and would end up heating the upper atmosphere, so that could be a concern.

.

High altitude and the use of selective materials that radiate well in frequencies most likely to make the escape, should result in a meaningful portion of the heat being radiate off the earth and into space.

.

For anyone just jumping into the conversation at this point, I am not proposing this be done nor suggesting it is likely in the near future.

.

This conversation springs from a hypothetical situation in which unlimited power becomes freely or very cheaply available, and ways that the ensuing heat pollution might be mitigated.

I think the blocking method would be best, moving low grade heat might just generate more than is moved (with today's technologies), or at least not have enough effiency to be worth the time.

Screening the polar regions would protect the ice caps, but to reduce air temp, the deserts and cities radiate heat to the air. Some sort of cloud cover or orbital system might help.

Perhaps large scale salt water evaporation in regions with excessive heat would work. The evaporation would use low grade heat and add moisture to the atmosphere possibly helping stop the spread of arid regions. Salt would have to be returned to the sea if accumulation became significant.

I guess with an unlimited energy supply resources could be manipulated to correct the consequences...now all we need is the energy and then we would have to convince everyone to conserve heat!

Drew K

Attempting anything to this effect would have two MAJOR effects apart from those being discussed:

1. A phenomenal long term stimulation to the economy as a result of designing, building and maintaining these systems- this would make the Apollo missions look like childplay,
2. Highly increased burden on the medical system as a result of all the "greenies" that would have heart attacks!

Too bad they don't mention a practical application for the oxidized silicon byproduct as part of the article. The unfortunate thing about the blog article is that it makes the nanosilicon appear to be a catalyst rather than a constituent of a redox process. Just wait for all the free energy wingdings to get going!!

Isn't oxidized silicon the same thing as glass?

Depending on the physical & oxidation state and reduced partner(s) it could also be sand, silicone etc..

Silicone® is GE trademark for an elastomer?

Polydimethylsiloxane. Also called silicone (unbelievable how many people don't know the difference between silicon & silicone- hate to think of silicon being used for um, medical purposes- oh wait, they don't use silicone for that any more, do they?), neat stuff & it is an oxidation product of silicone.

"...neat stuff & it is an oxidation product of silicone."

You mean, an oxidation product of silicon? (note absence of trailing 'e')

Did anybody measure how much energy to took to make the 10nm silicon?

(And how do you make it--electrolysis of sand?)

The same is true for silicon photovoltaics as I recall. The energy expended on manufacturing the cells exceeds that produced by the cells themselves over their operational lifetime?

Batteries. Easier than lugging around a nuclear reactor (unless it's a Mr. Fusion).

That free lunch thing again. It's more the appetite than hunger that make people want to be invited.