Nanotubes for fuel cells.

[SkepticLance]

I have always taken an optimistic view of the future for humanity. A discussion I was in a little while ago included people who argued that resource depletion would slow or reverse progress. An example given was the shortage of platinum as a catalyst for vital processes, such as hydrogen fuel cells.

 

My view has been that human ingenuity can overcome most problems, by finding alternatives. Thus I was most interested to find that, not only can Platinum in fuel cells be replaced, but can be done so with an alternative that is four times better.

 

http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2009/February/05020902.asp

 

Carbon nanotubes that are doped with nitrogen can catalyse the hydrogen fuel cells, and much more effectively than Platinum. The researchers say that even nanotubes are not essential. The same effect could be obtained with other forms of carbon doped with nitrogen, making the technology available in the near future.

[iNow]

Interesting article, Lance. Thanks for sharing.

 

This bit seemed to be the key to the research:

 

It was already known that carbon nanotubes containing iron were effective catalysts for oxygen reduction, with the iron-carbon centres forming the catalytic active site. Dai's team, however, has shown that efficient catalysts can be made from a carbon nanotube scaffold without the need for metals, demonstrating a novel mechanism for the catalysis. They suggest that this new catalytic mechanism could be incorporated in other materials or used for other applications where the reduction of oxygen is required.

 

I tend to share your general perspective that we can often use our ingenuity to overcome many resource problems, I just ensure that I temper that perspective with recognition of scale requirements and funding limitations.

 

 

With that said, you made a comment about which I'm curious:

I was most interested to find that, not only can Platinum in fuel cells be replaced, but can be done so with an alternative that is four times better.

 

http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2009/February/05020902.asp

 

I don't know what you mean here, nor did the article you linked seem to support or clarify your assertion. I have two basic questions.

 

One, better how? Is it four times cheaper, four times more durable, four times faster, four times less impactful to the environment? Four times what?

Two, where is that supported? What is your source?

 

 

On that note, the article certainly ended much less "optimistic" than you. Thankfully, they provided a sense of realism and context for the work:

 

Paul Christensen of the University of Newcastle in the UK -who has been working on fuel cells for many years -says the nanotubes have interesting properties, but disagrees with Dai that the expense of the electrode is what has held back the take-up of these alkaline fuel cells. 'The big problem with alkaline fuel cells is not the expense of the electrode material, but the failure to date to develop an alkaline version of the solid polymer electrolyte employed in acidic fuel cells, such as Nafion. This has made alkaline fuel cells impractical in terms of size and complexity, and ruled out the use of liquid fuels such as methanol. Electrode materials are not that relevant,' he told

Chemistry World.

 

Fortuntately, that particular limitation is just another area where we can use our ingenuity to succeed.

[SkepticLance]

iNow

The reason that my post was slightly different to the reference, or at least included different elements, is that my first discovery of this research was from a paper copy of New Scientist. Since I could not reference that onto an internet post, I googled the author, and found an alternative reference. Sorry I did not make that clear.

 

The 14 Feb page 22 paper version of New Scientist article quotes Liming Dai as saying :

" ...iron free nanotubes were even better than platinum."

And goes on to say

" The team's devise produces four times as much electric current as an equivalent using platinum."

[iNow]

The 14 Feb page 22 paper version of New Scientist article quotes Liming Dai as saying :

" ...iron free nanotubes were even better than platinum."

And goes on to say

" The team's devise produces four times as much electric current as an equivalent using platinum."

 

Aha! I had a feeling you'd just read that elsewhere. Thanks for clarifying, Lance. It's the "electric current" that is better.

[morganparkar]

Hi,

Researchers have shown that arrays of vertically grown carbon nanotubes could be used as the catalyst in fuel cells. The carbon nanotubes, which are doped with nitrogen, would be much cheaper and longer lasting than the expensive platinum catalysts used now.