Grant Awarded for Solar Hydrogen Generation

http://renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=37976
Grant Awarded for Solar Hydrogen Generation
October 17, 2005 Guildford, UK [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] The BOC Foundation awarded funding to Hydrogen Solar Ltd. to develop and demonstrate a scalable system that will produce carbon-free, sustainable hydrogen directly from sunlight and water using the Hydrogen Solar Tandem Cell array. The project is due to be up and running in the UK next summer, with the contract lasting to October 2007.
The Tandem Cell is a self-contained single unit that directly splits water molecules into high-purity hydrogen and oxygen using the energy from sunlight. No external electricity is required. The process is renewable, produces no carbon dioxide or other emissions. By using a modular design, the array can be built to an infinite variety of sizes, making it suitable for a wide range of industrial and energy applications.
In the first phase, Hydrogen Solar will design, build and install a 100-m2 array of Tandem Cells to generate high-purity hydrogen.
"This project will validate the Tandem Cell as a viable, low cost and environmentally friendly method of generating hydrogen for both today's industrial markets and for the future hydrogen-energy economy," said David Auty, Hydrogen Solar Ltd., Chief Executive.
The BOC Group will provide engineering safety expertise, compression units and engineering support during the installation.
"Economic production of hydrogen from renewables is key in turning the hydrogen energy vision into reality. Projects such as the Tandem Cell are vital stepping stones to the commercial deployment of hydrogen energy," said John Carolin, BOC Group, Global Director, Sustainable Energy.
The second phase will demonstrate the Tandem Cell array over a six-month period at the Beacon Energy Ltd. site at West Beacon Farm, Leicestershire. The system will provide hydrogen for fuel cell applications, to provide electricity for recharging electric vehicles, and for heat and power for various buildings.
"The prospect of a panel on the roof of a house to produce emission-free motoring is a fantastic vision towards a zero carbon society, and the BOC Foundation's foresight is a catalyst for this vision," said Prof Tony Marmont, Beacon Energy Ltd., Director.
For further Information
* Hydrogen Solar Ltd. http://www.hydrogensolar.com/

First thing they need to post is the initial cost and output/m^2-day.
Bret Cahill

Bret Cahill wrote:

First thing they need to post is the initial cost and output/m^2-day.
Bret Cahill

What for. It's clearly labelled a RESEARCH PROJECT, which is never intended to be profitmaking other than if you consider knowledge-advancement "profits".
You H2-Haters can't stop for one minute. How much "profit" was there developing nukes for the first 10 years?
Satellites were the first applications of PV in space, how much profit did they make for the first 20 years?
How much profits have the PV powered Mars Rovers made?

Melchizedek wrote:

Bret Cahill wrote:
First thing they need to post is the initial cost and output/m^2-day.
Bret Cahill
What for. It's clearly labelled a RESEARCH PROJECT, which is never intended to be profitmaking

Virtually all high bucks RESEARCH PROJECTS are intended to profit by scamming the government funding.
The subject matter is of no consequence whatsoever.
-- Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073 Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552 rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don@tinaja.com
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

Don Lancaster wrote:

Melchizedek wrote: Bret Cahill wrote:
First thing they need to post is the initial cost and output/m^2-day.
Bret Cahill
What for. It's clearly labelled a RESEARCH PROJECT, which is never intended to be profitmaking
Virtually all high bucks RESEARCH PROJECTS are intended to profit by scamming the government funding.
The subject matter is of no consequence whatsoever.

If it wasn't for these scams you would not have satellite communications, microwave telephone circuits, or fiber optics to spread your SPAM all over the world through the internet you wouldn't have either.
Republican LUDDITES wanting to keep us in the dark ages are always spamming their complaints about science investments. "Only industrialists should have money" is the core of their belief system. Good thing for most of inventions history your kind didn't hold political power -- now that you do we can finally see the "experiment" of what society looks like when research comes to a halt (in this country).

Melchizedek wrote:

If it wasn't for these scams you would not have satellite communications,

invented by a science fiction author
microwave telephone circuits,
privately funded by BTL
or fiber optics
Largely uselessly obsolete and outrageously expensive; cannot even give the stuff away on eBay.
to spread

your SPAM all over the world through the internet

which would not have existed if I had not invented Al Gore.
you wouldn't have

either.

Spamming the internet is a thankless task, but sombody has got to do it.
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/marcia.pdf
-- Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073 Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552 rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don@tinaja.com
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

Don Lancaster wrote:

Melchizedek wrote:
If it wasn't for these scams you would not have satellite communications,
invented by a science fiction author

So you are claiming that satellite communications was totally financed by Arthur C. Clark? <snicker at the dimbulb fool>

microwave telephone circuits,
privately funded by BTL

So there was never any public funding of microwaves? <snicker at blithering drunk fool>

or fiber optics
Largely uselessly obsolete and outrageously expensive; cannot even give the stuff away on eBay.

So no internet backbones are made of high volume fiber optic cables? <snicker at jibbering idiot fool>

to spread your SPAM all over the world through the internet
which would not have existed if I had not invented Al Gore.

What rightard would have committed to connecting every school and library and local government to the internet by 2000? What rightard would have originated and pushed through the construction of hurricane-proof internet backbones designed to withstand 'nukular' strikes? <snicker at alcohol-soaked Lancaster>

you wouldn't have either.
Spamming the internet is a thankless task, but sombody has got to do it.

You can stop now. Your 5000 anti-hydrogen posts recorded by google show you hold the world's record for ant-hydrogen posts. Your record is safe -- nobody in the history of humanity will ever post nearly half so many anti-hydrogen posts. Nobody else is getting paid to do so.

FK wrote:

But it [hydrogen] is clearly *not* a solution to the CO2 pollution problem.

Not to detract from your reasoned critique of hydrogen as an energy carrier -- but CO2 is not (repeat NOT) "pollution".
CO2 is plant food. All life on this planet depends on the presence of CO2 in the atmosphere. Check out "carbon cycle".

Melchizedek wrote:

Bret Cahill wrote:
First thing they need to post is the initial cost and output/m^2-day.
Bret Cahill
What for. It's clearly labelled a RESEARCH PROJECT, which is never intended to be profitmaking other than if you consider knowledge-advancement "profits".
You H2-Haters can't stop for one minute. How much "profit" was there developing nukes for the first 10 years?
Satellites were the first applications of PV in space, how much profit did they make for the first 20 years?
How much profits have the PV powered Mars Rovers made?

I see now what drives your fuzzy thinking. You actually believe that those of us who have derided your strange commitment are "hydrogen haters". Actually that is not so. It is far from the truth. This NG has a fairly long history. Those you now defame were in the beginning very open minded to many schemes that purported to produce a hydrogen source for fuel use. However as we saw repeatedly one scheme after another that was either a direct violation of the laws of thermodynamics (they are not guide-line they really are laws of nature) we became rather jaded. We don't totally denigrate the value of hydrogen as a fuel. I even suggested to one former poster that his scheme for making hydrogen available via NaH (sodium hydride and water) would be a decent storage fuel device for special outboard motors and on shipboard life boats. The needed water would always be available and the trail of dead fish behind the lifeboat (due to the sodium hydroxide dumped overboard) would help show where they went when searchers came along. But only limited niche uses for such devices based on hydrogen are practicable at present. If you are a good enough engineer you might find some way to increase the efficiency of such devices to enlarge the number of niche uses. But it is clearly *not* a solution to the CO2 pollution problem. Talk sense and not invective and we will listen and present critiques when needed. FK

H2-PV wrote:

Don Lancaster wrote:
Melchizedek wrote:
If it wasn't for these scams you would not have satellite communications,
invented by a science fiction author
So you are claiming that satellite communications was totally financed by Arthur C. Clark? <snicker at the dimbulb fool
microwave telephone circuits,
privately funded by BTL
So there was never any public funding of microwaves? <snicker at blithering drunk fool
or fiber optics
Largely uselessly obsolete and outrageously expensive; cannot even give the stuff away on eBay.
So no internet backbones are made of high volume fiber optic cables? snicker at jibbering idiot fool
to spread
your SPAM all over the world through the internet
which would not have existed if I had not invented Al Gore.
What rightard would have committed to connecting every school and library and local government to the internet by 2000? What rightard would have originated and pushed through the construction of hurricane-proof internet backbones designed to withstand 'nukular' strikes? <snicker at alcohol-soaked Lancaster
you wouldn't have
either.
Spamming the internet is a thankless task, but sombody has got to do it.
You can stop now. Your 5000 anti-hydrogen posts recorded by google show you hold the world's record for ant-hydrogen posts. Your record is safe -- nobody in the history of humanity will ever post nearly half so many anti-hydrogen posts. Nobody else is getting paid to do so.

Clearly you are the one who is the paid propagandist. Scientists and engineers took their vows of poverty when they entered the fields of technology. Only those who flack purported new schemes of energy production are the tru scammers who get paid by fleecing suckers with their blue sky schemes. FK

LongmuirG wrote:

FK wrote:
But it [hydrogen] is clearly *not* a solution to the CO2 pollution problem.
Not to detract from your reasoned critique of hydrogen as an energy carrier -- but CO2 is not (repeat NOT) "pollution".
CO2 is plant food. All life on this planet depends on the presence of CO2 in the atmosphere. Check out "carbon cycle".

The recent dramatic rise of atmospheric CO2 is the primary cause of global warming.
At present it is the WORST pollutant and clearly needs the MOST attention given it.
-- Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073 Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552 rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don@tinaja.com
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com

Virtually all high bucks RESEARCH PROJECTS are intended to profit by scamming the government funding.

I agree, Don. Spending a billion a day occupying Iraq is MUCH better use of government funding than actually seeking out alternative fuel sources. How dare they waste money that could go into building better smart bombs!
/Roy

fkasner wrote:

Melchizedek wrote: Bret Cahill wrote:
First thing they need to post is the initial cost and output/m^2-day.
Bret Cahill
What for. It's clearly labelled a RESEARCH PROJECT, which is never intended to be profitmaking other than if you consider knowledge-advancement "profits".
You H2-Haters can't stop for one minute. How much "profit" was there developing nukes for the first 10 years?
Satellites were the first applications of PV in space, how much profit did they make for the first 20 years?
How much profits have the PV powered Mars Rovers made?
I see now what drives your fuzzy thinking. You actually believe that those of us who have derided your strange commitment are "hydrogen haters". Actually that is not so. It is far from the truth.

Explain how many hours of your life you actually spent debunking the Hydrogen-Hater Lies.

This NG has a fairly long history.

Yes it does have a long history and it includes at least one person who willfully engages in preditated felony violation of federa laws by maliciously sending viruses and Denial-of-Service attacks on people who don't know that the newsgroup is stalked by one or more professional-level criminals. Only the H2-Haters survive perpetually to sandbag with well-honed lies that baffle newbies into believing the bullcrap.

Those you now defame were in the beginning very open minded to many schemes that purported to produce a hydrogen source for fuel use. However as we saw repeatedly one scheme after another that was either a direct violation of the laws of thermodynamics (they are not guide-line they really are laws of nature) we became rather jaded.

The laws of physics, thermodynamics included, were not violated when rockets were launched into space using H2 as fuel. That should have been a clue about what the universe permits.
The laws of physics, thermodynamics included, were not violated when Mars Rovers are powered by Solar PV panels. That should have been a clue about what the universe permits.
So, some people had cracket-pot ideas that would never work -- that cannot undermine reality of what you have seen work. It's not about thermodynamics now, but all about making it work within a skewed economy biased towards Oil Plutocrats interests. That's a harder problem to solve, but smart guys can do it, using EMC SoG Si PV and Geopolymer H2 containments. Smart guys have already done it, and it broke no laws of thermodynamics.

We don't totally denigrate the value of hydrogen as a fuel. I even suggested to one former poster that his scheme for making hydrogen available via NaH (sodium hydride and water) would be a decent storage fuel device for special outboard motors and on shipboard life boats. The needed water would always be available and the trail of dead fish behind the lifeboat (due to the sodium hydroxide dumped overboard) would help show where they went when searchers came along. But only limited niche uses for such devices based on hydrogen are practicable at present. If you are a good enough engineer you might find some way to increase the efficiency of such devices to enlarge the number of niche uses. But it is clearly *not* a solution to the CO2 pollution problem. Talk sense and not invective and we will listen and present critiques when needed. FK

THE CO2 Problem, the one that will continue inflicting damages, killing cities, killing people, killing enonomic stability, does not even begin to subside until after H2-PV is installed worldwide.
The last time the world saw such a drunken party binge of hydrocarbon exhaust was WWII which took a few years for the CO2 sinks to get filled to capacity, to overcapacity, and the hurricanes to increase in intensity. 1950-1959 is the second worst 10-year stretch in weather history for our records, 1960-1969 was third worst as the damages tapered off over 20 years. 1996-2005 beats them all for vicious disruptive weather -- and it will take 20 years or more for nature to eat your crap.
This is not a good time in history to lie about alternative to CO2 pollution -- a jury from New Orleans might put you on the gallows for accessory to mass murder.
Anything that exists is not against the laws of thermodynamics. Just because some dildo advocates colonizing the sun, it does not disprove that humans have colonized the earth. Same with scatterbrained H2 or PV suggestions -- if they exist alreadty they do not defy the laws of thermodynmics no matter how you weasle about your obstructionism.

Don Lancaster wrote:

Not to detract from your reasoned critique of hydrogen as an energy carrier -- but CO2 is not (repeat NOT) "pollution".
CO2 is plant food. All life on this planet depends on the presence of CO2 in the atmosphere. Check out "carbon cycle".
The recent dramatic rise of atmospheric CO2 is the primary cause of global warming.
At present it is the WORST pollutant and clearly needs the MOST attention given it.
-- Many thanks,
Don Lancaster

WHO ARE YOU? And what have you done with the real Don Lancaster?

Roy. Just Roy. wrote:

Virtually all high bucks RESEARCH PROJECTS are intended to profit by scamming the government funding.
I agree, Don. Spending a billion a day occupying Iraq is MUCH better use of government funding than actually seeking out alternative fuel sources. How dare they waste money that could go into building better smart bombs!
/Roy
The best use of government funding is to not collect the funds in the

first place.
-- Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073 Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552 rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: don@tinaja.com
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com