Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

Novel Sugar-to-Hydrogen Technology in Development

By Susan Trulove
May 23, 2007   |   16 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
"So it is environmentally friendly, energy efficient, requires no special infrastructure, and is extremely safe... We have hydrogen production with a mild reaction and low cost. We have hydrogen storage and transport in the form of starch or syrups. And no special infrastructure is needed."

-- Y.H. Percival Zhang, Virginia Tech, assistant professor of biological systems engineering
16 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 16
May 25, 2007
Sounds too good to be true doing something like fermentation in the gas tank without any messy byproducts or maintenance requirements. Can you just start and stop the reaction as needed? It would be fabulous if it works.
Comment
2 of 16
May 25, 2007
Would be fascinating if cane sugar was used.
There are 22 hydrogen molecules hanging there.
Comment
3 of 16
May 26, 2007
Technically, one must question if the enzymes will even last the 300 miles promised on one tank of starch. I'm familiar with some starch crunching enzymes, and they are stable, but not indefinitely. I bet enzymes have to be added at least with every new tank of starch. I wish the article had included info on the enzyme stability and endurance. I'm not worried about breathing these enzymes, because they are likely common ones that our bodies already know. The genetic engineering has come in combining the enzymes from different sources together, not creating new ones altogether.
Comment
4 of 16
May 26, 2007
Without agreeing or disagreeing with the technology, this sounds like something that is worth researching.
If we are going to reduce our dependency on foreign oil then we need all the good ideas we can come up with. Even if only one in one thousand pan out as viable, without research we will never know. I don;t think anyone who reads these articles wants to keep things going as they are for another hundred years. Support by the federal government for research into these types of projects sounds like a very forward thinking idea. Redirecting some of the money being spent on other things (you know where I am going with this don't you!) into these types of projects can only benefit our nation/world. In fact we should DEMAND that our country become more self sufficient from an energy standpoint.
Comment
5 of 16
May 26, 2007
I though that splitting water with solar you endid up with oxygen and hydrogen why use the other system to get co2..can someone answer me
Comment
6 of 16
May 26, 2007
WOW! Did everyone forget their medication?I'd love to put sugar in my gas tank and go go go with a REG TECH engine or a XSUNX sun roof powering a Raser electric motor.
Comment
7 of 16
May 26, 2007
Until there is a national energy policy to produce energy that can work on a planetary scale, all the grand ideas for producing energy are just money grabbing schemes. If one accepts the premise that energy is an entitlement for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the problem becomes how to produce pollution free energy for every man, woman and child on this planet. In place of who can grab some of the oil money? You will know them by their works.
Comment
8 of 16
May 26, 2007
What a stupid idea. The process still produces co2. Cars should be electric.
Comment
9 of 16
May 26, 2007
They are pushing the corn industry by using starch. They are not using sugar. Corn is not the answer. Why spend all the money to grow corn then need to convert the starch to sugar? Why not grow just sugar such as sugarcane? Buy starch in the store, then buy these unknown enzymes? Food cost go up, and who knows what these enzymes we will be breathing will do to us? Maybe worse than CO2. And what about climate? These new manmade enzymes are going to work below zero temperatures? Then the car is going to be a new creation, putting more stress on the economy. We can't buy new cars now with the price of gas, and they sure are not going to give us less expensive starch hydro cars, simply because they use technology to inflate prices, instead of reducing them. This is a typical American practice, make it seems great, when it fact it is a real loser!
Comment
10 of 16
But if the actual burning of hydrogen happens from this process then the oil hydrocarbons will be reduced. No more expensive tankers transporting from the middle east. Then terrorists will have hydrocarbons to fight with and not guns and bullet. There economy will stumble. Big oil will hen be changed. Thomas Jefferson always wanted the U.S. economy to be agriculturally based. Finally his prayers will be fulfilled if this comes about.
Comment
11 of 16
May 27, 2007
Frank: You can produce hydrogen from water using solar/PV. While this has the advantage of simplicity, electrolysis is 70% - 80% efficient; a hydrogen fuel cell 30% - 40% efficient. The round trip solar to hydrogen to power loses 70% - 80% of the solar power. A battery is far better--preserving 70% to 80% of the energy rather than losing that amount. Hydrogen wastes most of the precious, high cost solar energy and pushes it in the wrong financial direction.

Storage is a "BIG PROBLEM" with hydrogen. This technology is taking a smart approach. If successful, it will eliminate the need for superchilled or very high pressure hydrogen tanks, both energy drains as well as major practical challenges.

As for the CO2, if the carbohydrate is biological, then there is no net addition to the atmosphere. The plant created the carbohydrate out of atmospheric CO2 to begin with, so CO2 coming out of the fuel cycle is balanced by CO2 going into it. This is an elegant solution. I hope it works.
Comment
12 of 16
May 29, 2007
if you burn hydrogen to turn a generator to make electricity is it mor or less efficient than a fuel cell using the hydrogen to make electricity?
Comment
13 of 16
I expect a fuel cell to be more efficient as there are no moving parts as its a chemical-to-electric conversion. This is the breakthrough we have been waiting for. Anyway like many of these stories there is always more to them than meets the eye, but still its a positive indicator and things can only improve from here as they do more research.

www.lottomagic.com
Great Lotto Syndicate Software
Comment
14 of 16
May 30, 2007
La nina 2007 is here causing a drought and taking crops for fuel will drive food costs up especially with meat.Be practical and using the existing natural gas and use hydrostatic acoustics to convert it to a liquid.it will be an easier additive with our current gas.Furthermore ,there would be no emissions once it is used and there would be no need to add another fuel pump.
Comment
15 of 16
May 30, 2007
The opportunities for the future for new forms of hybrid or solar -electric and hydrogen fuel cell automobile transportations is coming sooner then we might think.

Climate change will be the determining factor because
of failure of the automobile industry refusal to convert over to the technologies or establish any bench mark that would provide direction or vision since the 1970s due to those hidden investors behind the executive boards rooms across America who may be seating behind the desk of other executive boards rooms found with in the Oil industry helping to create the obstacle and barriers for change that has help create the climate for economic dependence to foreign oil and an ancient ad equated 18th century technology.
Wisdom2See
Comment
16 of 16
May 31, 2007
Earl you do fill your tank with Sugar for energy, Why not use Adenosine Tri-Phosphate. Perhaps mitochondria could be the solution to our energy needs.Do organisms "Burn" hydrogen? The electron micrograph of a mitochondrial cross section does look strikingly similar to the schematic of a Tokomak does it not? And all that Heme Iron, could that serve a function? Most effecient mitichondria? Shrew guts. Feed the food to an organism first, than utilize the excrement for chattel energy, and the organism for food. exploitat the Otswald Process for nitro based fuel as well as methane digestion, and starch/ethanol production.Emission catalysts tend to be expensive, need chaper catalytic methods,ENZYMES. But more to the core of the article they dont say how they plan to transmit the H energy into propulsion. If the plan is to "recharge" starch batteries than wecan exploit algal blooms and Kudzu as a fuel source
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. Renewable Energy World Africa European Wind Energy Association Hydrogen Education Foundation Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America SunMaxx Solar Rotork plc
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters