Back of envelope calculations for hydrogen production through gallium catalyst

Update:

Perhaps that analysis was too critical. The analysis assumed was not theoretical maximum efficiency. The news claim was that some "new" catalyst was developed that gets closer to maximum efficiency in the reaction. The reaction involved is 2Al + 3H20 => 3H2 + Al203. Sorry about the illegibility of this. The equation says two moles of aluminum + three moles of water will yield 3 moles of hydrogen gas and a mole of alumina waste compound. Therefore, the maximum yield possible from the equation is: 2 moles of aluminum, with the atomic weight of 27, which gives 54 grams per mole as aluminum input-- and 3 moles of hydrogen gas ( having two atoms of hydrogen in each molecule), which yields 6 grams of hydrogen output. The ratio is then 54/6= 9 grams aluminum per gram of hydrogen. That's the best you can possibly do.

Multiply it by a thousand to get the kilograms. Since it takes 13 kwh to produce 1 kg of aluminum; then it would take 13 kilowatt/hrs times 9 kg per kg hydrogen produced to reconstitute the aluminum from waste. That's too much energy, since it probably would take less energy to just electrolyze water.

Basically, it just doesn't make sense to do this. Even with the best possible yields, it still does not make sense. That's why it will probably be attempted anyway. That's the way society rolls these days. Sadly.

 

There has been some mention of the possibility of using gallium to extract hydrogen from water. As an energy source, this looks like it could be interesting. So I decided to run some numbers to figure if the thing was feasible or not.

According to one source, it takes a 3 to 1 ratio of gallium to aluminum to make the best composite. The composite will be mixed with water, which produces the hydrogen. It almost seems like magic. The gallium is not consumed, and can be used again and again. Basically, you just have to come up with the aluminum. Ah, there's the catch. Also, what do you do with the alumina mixture? Do you reuse it?

If you were to try to make a "closed loop" of making hydrogen, then reconstituting the aluminum, to be used again, then you won't have an economical set up. That's because of the high energy cost of producing aluminum. Currently, (no pun intended) it uses electrolysis to extract the aluminum from alumina; and it takes 13.2 kwh/kg for the aluminum to be produced. How much hydrogen can thus be produced? The ratio is rather high to extract 1 kg of hydrogen using the gallium/aluminum catalyst.

For each gram of composite used, it makes 130 milliters of hydrogen. But there's 1000 milliters in one liter. What is the ratio in mass? One "mole" of hydrogen masses at 1 gram. Also, 1 mole of hydrogen is 22.4 liters at standard temperature and pressure. Therefore, 130 ml of hydrogen isn't much. The math is 130/22400 grams, where 130 is the amount produced, and 22400 milliters in one mole. One mole of hydrogen masses at 1 gram as mentioned, so this would be .0058 grams. Not much. You would need 1000 / .0058 in order to obtain 1 kg of hydrogen using this process. That would be 172 kg of composite to produce one kg of hydrogen. Divide by three gives the amount of aluminium required--57.3 kg.

The problem is all that energy to get back to pure aluminum. 57.3 times 13.2 kwh/kg for each kg of aluminum by the electroysis process mentioned above. It makes no sense to go this way unless you use scrap aluminum, and you have no intention to recycle the alumina produced to make the hydrogen. It makes much more sense to reuse the aluminum that already exists.

Come to think of it, I may have done all this before. Seems like there was a post on this subject way back when.

Yes, I found that analysis, but it didn't involve gallium. This analysis is no more encouraging that one was. It may make more sense to electrolyze water than to do it this way.

Election aftermath

It appears to me that the fortunes of the Republican Party could be in danger of falling apart completely. A lot has to do with this latest debacle of an election.

To tell you the truth, I wondered about "hanging up the spurs" with respect to political commentary on this blog, but I will keep on. At least for now.

The biggest and worst part of the aftermath may well be the infighting within the party. As to who is most responsible, I don't know, and I don't care. It is this infighting, which is taking place in front of everyone, that has to be brought to an end. The political opposition is watching in glee as this is taking place. It can only give them satisfaction and hope.

The political left has no reason to feel hope in the way that they've run the country down into the ground. Those of us who oppose the political left should not help them in any way. As long as this carries on, things are only going to get worse. We seem to be our own worst enemies.

Is there any way out of this mess? Maybe not. I have some definite ideas about what is wrong, and have expressed it many times on this blog, but there is very little audience here, and no sway at all.

For those who may be curious, and still visit this blog, this explains where I stand. If I do decide to hang up the spurs, don't be surprised. If we cannot iron out the differences and make useful agreements, then there really isn't much hope going forward.

That's all.

Aneutronic fusion device

Helion pulsed fusion device

By the way, "helion" means an ion made of Helium-3. Not to be confused with some local brat.

Here's a fusion device that I haven't looked at before. It doesn't appear too complicated, nor too hard to grasp.

The claims being made seem rather bold. They believe that they can do this in the not too distant future. How soon? Very soon.

The way it works is better explained elsewhere, though. Basically, they create a plasma, and then smash it, against another one they make, at 1 million mph (otherwise known as ludicrous speed). They say that they've accomplished some pretty ludicrous temperatures this way, which helps it all work ludicrously cheap and abundantly.

It looks like they will produce some neutrons, after all. Neutrons are ungood. Also, they have to use Helium-3 as a fuel. Helium-3 is ludicrously expensive and rare. There always seems to be a catch, drat it. Not to worry, there's plenty of the stuff on the moon. But you have to get there, and put a lot of mining equipment there. Hmm. Another catch. Paging Elon Musk, paging Elon Musk.

There is another possible source of Helium-3, and that is the device itself. So if it can get going, then it will be able to at least partially supply itself. Neat trick.

More Politics Schmolitics

Yesterday, before any of the results came in, I didn't think I'd be writing something like this. Yep, and here I am. Seems like a broken record. By the way, if there's anyone reading it who doesn't understand the phrase "broken record", then just chalk it up to an older person's experience. These days, people don't listen to music on vinyl records that are on a turntable. I've read that younger people went for the Democrat line.

Anyway, to get down to it, the results yesterday bespeak SOMETHING. But what exactly? I'd say "more of the same". Whatever we've been getting, we're going to get a whole lot more. Isn't staying the same a "conservative" idea? In that case, the Dems are better at conservativism than the so-called conservatives.

The Democrats are really good at demonizing their opponents. The Republicans are really good at letting them get away with it. It works for the Dems, and it works, and it works. It's not clear what that does for Republicans, but they seem to enjoy it somehow.

There WAS an exception, or two. Ron DeSantis won big. He gets to be the hero--- at least for awhile. If he is to succeed, he has to remain the hero. Remember the time Rudy Giuliani was the hero? Not anymore. The hero can become the villain. The Democrats are really good at making GOP'ers into villains. The GOP'ers seem all too willing to let themselves become villains. I don't know what the GOP'ers are getting out of it. Maybe they like to be whipping boys.

It's almost like their doing it all on purpose! Well...... maybe they are.

Let's see how long DeSantis gets to be the good guy. The knight in shining armor who will ride to our rescue. If he is not particularly skillful in avoiding such a fate, he will be demonized. And soon.

Politics Schmolitics once again

This topic is not one that I really like, but here I go again...

Naturally, at this point, the GOP is going to fall short of their most fondest imaginations. It might be too early to say, but they may not even win the Senate. There was some big talk about upwards of 56 seats. Ha. Ha. Ha.

Why do I disklike politics so much? Maybe because all of it is just total bullshit. All of it. Particularly in the chattering classes.

I didn't follow the state races very closely. I DO note that Governor Abbott in my state, has won easily. Also, Florida Governnor DeSantis won big. Could it be that the politics of COVID would have worked, but was not employed? Hard to say since I didn't follow it very closely. But I note that the those governors that were most lenient in the COVID restrictions did the best. This means that an opportunity might have been lost. That wouldn't surprise me in the least, if that were the case.

The Democracy issue didn't do that well, but didn't fall flat on its face like I thought it should. It appears to have worked in getting the Democrats pumped up enough to go to the polls. So maybe it DID work well enough for them. It shouldn't have, but it appears to have worked.

There are those in the so-called "right" side of politics that do more harm than good. That's because of what I've been saying. They identify themselves as "right", and so the public will not agree with them. It is too easy to paint them as fascist, and people won't vote for that. It is shooting oneself in the foot to use that terminology, but it doesn't matter what I write here. People in the chattering classes on the so-called "right" will continue doing it, and they will continue to lose that way.

Perhaps it will still be a good night, but I'm a bit worried at this point that it won't be. It might even turn into a major disappointment.

Thought for today

There was a show on PBS a long time ago, which featured Carl Sagan. It was called Cosmos. Perhaps the oldtimers remember it, and maybe it has been seen enough so that most everybody knows about it, or have actually seen it. Quite the show that was.

So I looked for it on Tubi, and it wasn't there. However, there was something there that looked the same, but it wasn't the same. But I watched it anyway. It was fairly interesting, but as I watched it, I realized that this was a left wing propaganda type production. Philosophically, it was atheist. That means commie. Sorry if that offends, but I'll call them as I see them. Perhaps the admiration for Cosmos will have to be revisited some day. Perhaps it was misplaced.

There was something there that was close to being believable. Hard to put it into words, though. There is a belief amongst these people that the human race can rely upon rational intellect for salvation. Although this is certainly appealing to me, my own experiences seem to indicate otherwise. There is much to be hopeful about with respect to the potential of human reasoning, but the results have been somewhat disappointing. This is just as true in the general as in the specific.

It is all too easy to fall into traps and pitfalls.

Nevertheless, I am still more hopeful than pessimistic about the future. Things COULD work out, but they could just as easily not work out. In that respect, things haven't changed much in the last 40 years or so.

Some folks may think it ridiculous, but I was thinking of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, and they had just taken a bite, so to speak. Is this uber reliance upon human reasoning the same kind of thing as biting into that apple?

We are going to need a bigger boat.

Don Surber

...says governments do not get amnesty

Comment:

With regards to the Atlantic piece about covid amnesty, Surber has an interesting point to make. These folks are asking for forgiveness for what the government did, but will not give amnesty for what the public may have done elsewhere. If there is to be any amnesty, it will happen in the voting booth.

He says it in terms of a government's FUNCTION. It is not the government's FUNCTION to give itself amnesties for its own foul-ups. Surber didn't say it that way, but that's how I'll interpret it. Also, that the function of the "democracy" is to hold governments accountable for their acts while in power. If they are found to have been in substantial error ( this case, that is putting it rather mildly), then they should be held accountable at the ballot box. Asking for forgiveness is just not cricket.

If they feel that they did the right thing, then let them defend that. But if they can't, they don't get to say "oopsie, sorry about that". In that case, nobody in government ever makes mistakes, and even if they do, they should never have to answer for it. How then, is that a democracy? That's what happens in totalitarian regimes. They can do whatever they damn well please, and the public be damned.

Surber is right then. Of course he is. The public has every right to be angry, and they should not feel restrained at all in throwing the bums out. It happens every election year. It ought to happen a lot more than it does. Some 90% of the incumbents are returned to office. What reason do they have to pay attention to what the public wants?

It should be what a popularly elected government should be about, but isn't happening often enough. If it doesn't happen this cycle, we may not get another chance. If there was anything to hold the government accountable for, it is for these last two to three years.