Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday September 05 2018, @12:08PM   Printer-friendly
from the artificial-chlorophyl dept.

St John's College:

Photosynthesis is the process plants use to convert sunlight into energy. Oxygen is produced as by-product of photosynthesis when the water absorbed by plants is 'split'. It is one of the most important reactions on the planet because it is the source of nearly all of the world's oxygen. Hydrogen which is produced when the water is split could potentially be a green and unlimited source of renewable energy.

A new study, led by academics at St John's College, University of Cambridge, used semi-artificial photosynthesis to explore new ways to produce and store solar energy. They used natural sunlight to convert water into hydrogen and oxygen using a mixture of biological components and humanmade technologies.

The research could now be used to revolutionise the systems used for renewable energy production. A new paper, published in Nature Energy, outlines how academics at the Reisner Laboratory in Cambridge developed their platform to achieve unassisted solar-driven water-splitting.

Their method also managed to absorb more solar light than natural photosynthesis.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by dwilson on Wednesday September 05 2018, @04:09PM (9 children)

    by dwilson (2599) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 05 2018, @04:09PM (#730793) Journal

    This sure sounds like a great idea, but consider the possible downsides once it's adopted globally.

    The carbon dioxide emitted by a few campfires is irrelevant, an addition to the atmosphere that is lost in the statistical noise. Scale CO2 production up to current industrial levels, and the entire planet's climate starts to shift. We're seeing that now, today.

    Emitting oxygen (and possibly consuming that excess CO2 in the process, if it's really photosynthesis) instead sounds like a marvellous plan. Everyone knows CO2 is bad and O2 is good.

    ...except it isn't that simple on a global scale. The last time the atmosphere's oxygen content shifted on a huge scale, they called it the Oxygen Catastrophe [wikipedia.org], and it killed off most of the life on earth, leading to the evolution of new lifeforms that could take advantage of the increased energy available. It lead directly to us, helped by some other extinction events along the way.

    What do you suppose might happen if we start pumping up the O2 level in the air, by an amount comparable to what we've done with CO2? Something Bad, I'd imagine.

    I doubt it will come to that. After all, if the goal of this process is to make hydrogen, it will likely be used as a fuel, burned with oxygen to make water and the process will be balanced far better than any current CO2-based process is. But every time I see a new technology proposed with 'clean' emissions, I see no mention of the what-if's when it gets scaled up. That lack of foresight bothers me a bit.

    --
    - D
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Wednesday September 05 2018, @04:30PM (1 child)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 05 2018, @04:30PM (#730800) Journal

    "Scientists Pioneer a New Way to Turn Sunlight Into Fuel"
    As in, "after storing it for a while, you will burn that fuel at your convenience."
    Since the fuel is hydrogen, the result is the poisonous di-hydrogen monoxide. But that's beside the point.
    'Cause the point is: "that oxygen? not gonna star free for long enough".

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 2) by dwilson on Wednesday September 05 2018, @04:51PM

      by dwilson (2599) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 05 2018, @04:51PM (#730808) Journal

      "Scientists Pioneer a New Way to Turn Sunlight Into Fuel"
      As in, "after storing it for a while, you will burn that fuel at your convenience."
      Since the fuel is hydrogen, the result is the poisonous di-hydrogen monoxide. But that's beside the point.
      'Cause the point is: "that oxygen? not gonna star free for long enough".

      I doubt it will come to that. After all, if the goal of this process is to make hydrogen, it will likely be used as a fuel, burned with oxygen to make water and the process will be balanced far better than any current CO2-based process is.

      Yeah. I uh, mentioned that.

      --
      - D
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 05 2018, @04:55PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 05 2018, @04:55PM (#730810)

    Denies humans are causing climate change, cautions against humans removing too much CO2 for fear of making the atmosphere toxic to microorganisms.

    Make up your mind dude.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by acid andy on Wednesday September 05 2018, @05:15PM

    by acid andy (1683) on Wednesday September 05 2018, @05:15PM (#730817) Homepage Journal

    What do you suppose might happen if we start pumping up the O2 level in the air, by an amount comparable to what we've done with CO2? Something Bad, I'd imagine.

    At a guess, cars would start running more efficiently, but also rust quicker, and things would probably catch fire a lot more easily and burn more energetically.

    High levels of oxygen can be toxic. Hyperoxia can cause eye damage, lung inflammation and seizures.

    --
    If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 05 2018, @05:37PM (2 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday September 05 2018, @05:37PM (#730831) Journal

    What do you suppose might happen if we start pumping up the O2 level in the air

    I suppose, at first, corporations would start charging for breathing. Maybe tied to body weight or metabolism.

    Then they would start raising the prices of air.

    The poorest wouldn't be allowed to breathe. But corporate profits are at stake. We can't have any no freeloaders.

    --
    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    • (Score: 2) by arulatas on Thursday September 06 2018, @01:44PM (1 child)

      by arulatas (3600) on Thursday September 06 2018, @01:44PM (#731298)

      Turn on the Mega Maid

      --
      ----- 10 turns around
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 07 2018, @07:51AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 07 2018, @07:51AM (#731676)

        the code is 1 2 3 4 5

  • (Score: 2) by slap on Wednesday September 05 2018, @05:44PM (1 child)

    by slap (5764) on Wednesday September 05 2018, @05:44PM (#730842)

    CO2 is around 0.04% of the atmosphere, compared to 21% for oxygen. If we get a similar increase in oxygen as we have CO2 over the last few hundred years, we would increase the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere by around 1%.

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday September 05 2018, @08:08PM

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday September 05 2018, @08:08PM (#730930)

      O2 is already increased by measurable amounts in regions like the taiga where there are mostly trees and few animals.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]