Discover Magazine: Scientists Create World’s 1st Practical Artificial Leaf, 10X as Efficient as the Real Thing

[GhostofSparta]

Scientists Create World’s 1st Practical Artificial Leaf, 10X as Efficient as the Real Thing

What’s the News: This week, scientists say that they’ve passed a chemistry milestone by creating the world’s first practical photosynthesis device. The playing-card-sized photosynthetic gadget creates uses sunlight to split water molecules into oxygen and hydrogen, which can then be used to produce energy, and is reputedly 10 times more efficient than a natural leaf. Researchers say they expect it to revolutionize power storage, especially in remote areas that don’t currently have electricity. “A practical artificial leaf has been one of the Holy Grails of science for decades,” says lead researcher Daniel Nocera, who’s presenting this research at the National Meeting of the American Chemical Society this week. How the Heck:

• The artificial leaf uses nickel and cobalt as catalysts to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen by facilitating oxygen-oxygen bonding.
  
• Oxygen and hydrogen molecules are then sent to a fuel cell that can produce electricity. If the device is placed in a one-gallon bucket of water in bright sunlight, it can reportedly produce enough electricity to power a house in a developing nation.
  

Read the rest here

Science is not my strong point, history is. Perhaps those on here more scientifically literate could shed some light on if this is legit, and if the implications are as important as they claim in the article?

[PokerPacker]

so when will this make for an awesome underwater breathing device?

[Predicto]

so when will this make for an awesome underwater breathing device?

Only when they can make it into chewing gum form.

This seems like a really, really big deal.

However, this is depressing.

Tata Group, an Indian conglomerate, plans on creating a power plant based on this research within the next year and a half.

[Hubbs]

So how practical are the "It can power a house!" claims?

[GhostofSparta]

So how practical are the "It can power a house!" claims?

Well to be fair, what they say is "it can reportedly produce enough electricity to power a house in a developing nation." How likely that claim is, I'm unsure, but it's not like they're saying "Right now, this thing could power your modern suburban McMansion!" My guess is in remote parts of Africa and Asia, they don't need nearly the same amount of electricity as even rural Americans would.

[Predicto]

Well to be fair, what they say is "it can reportedly produce enough electricity to power a house in a developing nation." How likely that claim is, I'm unsure, but it's not like they're saying "Right now, this thing could power your modern suburban McMansion!" My guess is in remote parts of Africa and Asia, they don't need nearly the same amount of electricity as even rural Americans would.

It could mean that, but it could also just be a sloppy way of emphasizing that: "we may have a practical way to get electricity to remote areas in developing countries without all of the major infrastructure of more developed nations." I have no idea which meaning was intended. :whoknows:

[grhqofb5]

Ok, so this practical photosynthesis device will retail for what, about $9.4 Million? That's a lot of goats for a citizen of a third world country.

[joeknows]

So how practical are the "It can power a house!" claims?

i dunno but it sure seems that it takes a lot of leaves to power a tree! even if a tree had only 10% of its leaves thats still a lot of leaves to power a tree. however this could lead to cars that actually do run on water!

[Beans]

Now, we only need 10X the efficiency humans. Can't wait.

[Thiebear]

So an 800 sq foot house would need a approx. 2.8 million leaves.

[@DCGoldPants]

"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."

- Popular Mechanics, 1949

[PeterMP]

It is hard to tell whether it is accurate based on the story because of a lack of details, but he is a Professor at MIT that has been working on this for a long time so it certainly has the potential.

The important thing is that plants aren't really that effecient. That is why biomass isn't the sole answer to our energy problems. If we can't create technology that does better than plants, then we might as well just use plants, and there is no way we are ever going to satisfy our energy needs based only on plant matter.

Plants only convert about 4% of the total solar spectrum into energy (in their case chemical energy). Current photovoltaic cells that people actually use are at about 20%, but in research labs people report over 50%.

So if he's using 4% as the basis of what a leaf does, he's still behind the top of the line research grade photovoltaic cells.

The life time of his device in the real world will be key.