@Suzianne
It seems to be an alternative to hydrogen fuel cells, without needing to store the separated hydrogen under high pressure. It gets stored by being bonded with another chemical.
But I can't find a lot of detail on this. They mention the chemical processes involved, but there are no facts and figures that I can find (maybe I'm just not looking in the right places). Amazing claims are made, but it is easy to make these claims. It will work, but will it be better than current battery technology?
I guess we'll have to see how things progress.
3 edits
@Suzianne saidSure it is entirely possible, a proton is just a hydrogen atom without an electron so has a positive charge but the article is misleading, saying you split water into protons and such.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/green-tech/a63152930/proton-batteries/
What's up with this?
Is this possible or viable?
When you electrically split up water (I did that experiment when I was 12) if the electrodes are DC, not AC, you get hydrogen molecules off one electrode and oxygen molecules off the other electrode. Electrolysis is the name but the hydrogen is certainly NOT bare protons but a proton and a single electron.
Take out that electron and you still have hydrogen but ionized hydrogen and it takes energy to rip off that electron so there would be not much interest in just using pure protons.
Seems like a rather poorly written article.
For one thing you have to worry about the batteries catching fire, hydrogen is noticeably explosive🙂 and the next deal is temperature stability, does it work at 30 below? 110 above? How many recharge cycles can any battery do without going under the 80% capacity number the government specifies for such batteries and then there is energy density, in terms of two variables, one energy density VS VOLUME and the other energy density VS mass. The one about mass goes how many kilowatt hours does the battery produce per kilogram and the other how many kilowatt hours produced per cubic liter say.
That article SAYS lots of recharge cycles but that is the only number produced, 3500 recycles possible to keep 80% charge and they don't mention the 80% bit either nor actual energy density numbers.
There seems to be a plethora of articles saying BREAKTHROUGH and then goes They are on their way to make a bla bla bla process or other.
When such batteries are offered on the market and we see they are cheaper than lithium and good in cold and hot weather and high recharge cycles and more energy density and such, then it is a done deal but till then it is just could be article.
Like this, the end of the piece:
“We have designed a very good anode material,” Wu said, “and future work will move to the cathode side. We will continue designing new organic materials that have higher redox potential range to increase the battery output voltage. To enhance the usage of renewable energies, we have to develop some more efficient energy integration technologies and our proton battery design is a promising trial."
Notice the part where they admit they are only halfway there, now they have to concentrate on the cathode.
So how many years will THAT take for instance?