This is some smart stuff. I find it amazing that people are always coming up with schemes to further manipulate matter in the universe to serve us. It is fascinating.
Sure, let's break this down step by step in simpler terms: 1. Water Splitting: Splitting water into oxygen and hydrogen is a process that needs energy, about 237 kJ per mole of water. It also requires an electric potential of approximately 1.23 volts to move 4 hydrogen ions (H+) and 4 electrons (e-) around. 2. Natural Photosynthesis: In nature, plants use a special structure called the oxygen-evolving complex (OEC) that contains manganese. This complex helps plants create oxygen by forming bonds between oxygen atoms. 3. Semiconductor Nanowires: Scientists use tiny wires made of semiconductor materials to capture light energy. When these wires absorb light, they can use it to separate water into oxygen, protons (H+), and electrons (e-). 4. Electron and Proton Movement: The electrons produced in this process move in one direction, while the protons move through a special membrane called Nafion, which can conduct protons. Eventually, these protons are used to produce hydrogen. 5. Combining Different Systems: So, in artificial photosynthesis (APS), we combine two separate systems: one for capturing light energy and splitting water into oxygen, protons, and electrons, and another for moving those protons and electrons to create hydrogen. Overall, APS mimics how plants use sunlight to produce oxygen and adapt it for our purposes, creating hydrogen fuel in the process.
Unfortunately, since glucose is C6H12O6 (molecular weight = 180 Da) and a photon is massless (though some argue photons have mass according to E=hf), and according to the law of conservation of matter - matter cannot be created or destroyed under classical physical conditions. So unfortunately photons cannot be transformed into glucose, since massless “objects” cannot be transformed into objects with mass.
Is not relevant when you consider that the energy input is the sun, or wind, or whatever. They will certainly try to improve it, but you have to consider that the "boom" of pv technology is working with low cost PV panels with efficiencies around 30-40%, so...again, not that relevant.
@@felipebarrera8405 The PV panels we use nowadays on roofs and in solar parks have an effiency of around 18%. Globally the research on different kind of solar cells is tremendous and evolving rapidly. This is because the more efficient a solar cell, or in this case an artificial leaf is, the less area we need to generate enough electricity to power the planet. So the effiency of such a device is most certainly relevant, as well as the economic efficiency.
Ideally, yes. But, the more complex molecules require more energy to make. In the meantime, right now we have a global emergency just to get the CO2 out of the atmosphere into a solid form as fast as possible.
Plants are near 100% efficient at photosynthesis. And the main reason is because they are green. Manganese's and or stainless steal make excellent catalysts and they are abundant.
Time developing all this tech which is expensive and dificult instead every year more tons of co2 are introduced in the air which it would be difficult to transform all of it look at co2 scales that we are putting each year on the atmosphere and all the stuff, but we try....
What if these molecular machines keep on producing fuel for millions of years, uncontrollably? How to stop these machines before we switch them on, in excitment?
What I do not understand is if it is so amazing the invention like that than why aren't we using it now? We still have a problem with fossil fuels!!! Is it because the big companies don't want to use it because they would have to change everything like teaching people to use the new technology and fixing it if necessary, do new marketing or they just don't know if the new product would be acepted by consumers??
Well, dunno of Dr. Adam Hill's lab. But catalytic breakdown of CO2 and H2O to things like CH4 using sunlight is going well. A few of this tech. are preparing to leave lab as well. One such is done in ETH. You can see it by searching: "Carbon-neutral fuel made from sunlight and air".
For some folks, life also is WAY too long.. . . And why working and owning all those things you have to leave when dying ? "Its all so meaningless" (Frederic Nietzsche )
Could this possibly clean air to make it more breathable in some areas around the world as it produces energy? It sounds very interesting and I would like to know more about artificial photosynthesis.
It won't. For example, 4 yrs past, the outcome of this research is yet to be delivered. So, if u want clean air and healthy living, preserve the already existing ecosystems and let them thrive. Given all the high-tech stuff like GPS and Machine learning, it should be rather easy.
@@aniksamiurrahman6365 i don't think pointing to Machine Learning is a great comparison as someone who works in the field. It's still wildly volatile and its usage for this task would be incredibly energy demanding and would ultimately increase carbon pollution rather than decrease it, beyond the monumental and nightmarish task of data pipelining something that obscure and specific to a given ecosystem.
@@bearsaremonkeys Every research work is like that. So, by this logic, we should stop doing research altogether. Gaud, u shud tell that to your CEO and get to upper management fast. What I'm saying is that, we've better tools, if goodwill was there, we ud've found possible solution to many of them already.
50 years ago I made a study to find how much quantity of mineral compounds exist in one liter of Paint of rival producers... through electroscopy in IR fields...using a KBr... crysthal...and that was a "revolution" in that Industry... just guess... )))
Depending on what purpose you will utilize Formic Acid, you may not end up with CO2 release to the atmosphere. Even if you release CO2 you will reduce the same number of moles of CO2 through AP to obtain formic acid. The main purpose is clear and it is to utilize solar energy to get solar fuels as a substitution of utilizing fossil fuels.
it doesn't matter if the end product produces co2 or not, if it consumes it when being produced, same happens in nature, we produce co2 when we consume energy, while plants consume that co2 to produce energy for us, it creates balance
No, we breathe in oxygen an out carbon dioxide, also released from useing fossel fuel, coal, oil and such all create the co2 green house gas, traping the suns heat and thining our ozone layer that's all contributing to global warming making our earth warm and every day it increases, so captivating the hazard and puting it to use via replacing the greatest cause with the solutions. Bravo to all involved an how can we help?
End goal is to save the only planet in our solersystem capabale of sustaining life ( the only planet we can live on)(the only one that has water! Note *0.002% of wuch is drinkable thankyou) saving everyone's mother our earth our home. What is the goal, ummmm???
Also just so the world can note cannabis or pot pulls in 10x the co2 a tree does and puts out 10x the oxygen, but is agenst the law to grow because the use of it(smoking it) in Caucasian woman incresses there desires to sleep with African American men ( Fed's decision, to emphasize the banning of in the US .
I am impressed with the concept of artificial photosynthesis, the idea of creating a means for humans to gain is, as always, the first course to follow and act upon. I also feel the concept and configuration should be of a new thought process, out of the box. I have a RGF system operating in a brackish water canal that has tide effects. This small Rough Gravel Filtration system has magnified all aspects of life in this area, fish, fiddler crabs, mullet minnows, tarpon, birds, cranes, Red Headed woodpeckers, butterflies, etc. This small system has magnified life, algae, water is filtered by enhancing natures own process I feel that utilizing our thoughts into assisting nature by enhancing natures abilities to sustain the damage we present and will continue to present is the answer we seek. A better way to describe this in common terms is to stop treating nature as an opponent and give nature steroids to match our demands, we compensate assistance as required as to not surpass our needs and become subject to consequences of over production complications. We have lessoned Natures abilities to sustain the impact but, we are qualified to enhance natures abilities in all regards and magnify Natures abilities to match our demands by plant, by canal etc. etc. etc. By moving our thought to administering idealism into enhancing and magnifying natures abilities to match our demand as an Allie rather than a foe, we will find answers that have been right in front of us since the beginning
The electron from Co will react with CO2 to form a version of CO2 which is highly reactive. This reactive molecule can react with (I think water?) to form the acid.
I used to think about this in my high school ..happy to see that in detail
do you play strike fortress box
@@pushadevi9158 no
@@aditeayah thats a game. I played with a boy named aditya raj and he was talking about photosynthesis. I thought it was you
Yea glad someone smart enough did it thanks
Fun fact , I am in High school and thinking the same 😀😀
This is some smart stuff. I find it amazing that people are always coming up with schemes to further manipulate matter in the universe to serve us. It is fascinating.
Yeah and i find it very depressing that we keep on ignoring our mistakes of pasts that have lead us to our own destruction.
Really great Talk, Everyone should learn Chemistry and Physics.
I dont want to its sooo boring XD French and business studies for me pls
@@anaki_ow4038 science is boring for you... But it's our life
Can I learn it immediately? Or is there. Subject I need to learn first before it?
Sure, let's break this down step by step in simpler terms:
1. Water Splitting: Splitting water into oxygen and hydrogen is a process that needs energy, about 237 kJ per mole of water. It also requires an electric potential of approximately 1.23 volts to move 4 hydrogen ions (H+) and 4 electrons (e-) around.
2. Natural Photosynthesis: In nature, plants use a special structure called the oxygen-evolving complex (OEC) that contains manganese. This complex helps plants create oxygen by forming bonds between oxygen atoms.
3. Semiconductor Nanowires: Scientists use tiny wires made of semiconductor materials to capture light energy. When these wires absorb light, they can use it to separate water into oxygen, protons (H+), and electrons (e-).
4. Electron and Proton Movement: The electrons produced in this process move in one direction, while the protons move through a special membrane called Nafion, which can conduct protons. Eventually, these protons are used to produce hydrogen.
5. Combining Different Systems: So, in artificial photosynthesis (APS), we combine two separate systems: one for capturing light energy and splitting water into oxygen, protons, and electrons, and another for moving those protons and electrons to create hydrogen.
Overall, APS mimics how plants use sunlight to produce oxygen and adapt it for our purposes, creating hydrogen fuel in the process.
What about turning it into glucose food energy and eliminate the need for starch crops?
Good thinking, btw. Great minds think alike. ;)
Unfortunately, since glucose is C6H12O6 (molecular weight = 180 Da) and a photon is massless (though some argue photons have mass according to E=hf), and according to the law of conservation of matter - matter cannot be created or destroyed under classical physical conditions. So unfortunately photons cannot be transformed into glucose, since massless “objects” cannot be transformed into objects with mass.
@@martinwong8326
Negative - plants "cook up" glucose from sunlight and ingredients. That's what I'm suggesting here.
@@martinwong8326 ??? , are you forgetting about the required carbon dioxide , water and other minerals which DO contain mass??
@@martinwong8326 how do plants do it then? We mean creating an artificial process that mimics plants to create what we would call "food"
He didn't say what is the energy efficiency of his process
because it is too low :).. most probably not stable as well:)...
Is not relevant when you consider that the energy input is the sun, or wind, or whatever. They will certainly try to improve it, but you have to consider that the "boom" of pv technology is working with low cost PV panels with efficiencies around 30-40%, so...again, not that relevant.
@@felipebarrera8405 The PV panels we use nowadays on roofs and in solar parks have an effiency of around 18%. Globally the research on different kind of solar cells is tremendous and evolving rapidly. This is because the more efficient a solar cell, or in this case an artificial leaf is, the less area we need to generate enough electricity to power the planet. So the effiency of such a device is most certainly relevant, as well as the economic efficiency.
@@misterronie4 well, you are right, thank you for your reply, didn't consider the terrain factor which is capital intensive
bruv im just tryna finish doing my flipping bio homework, this guy talks way too slow man. waffler
same
put the video on 1.5x speed
you're on the wrong video dude haha. This has nothing to do with bio
@@tommcdonald9320 I'm also watching for a bio class
speed it up
I'm more interested in synthetic glucose. Can this make glucose?
Ideally, yes. But, the more complex molecules require more energy to make.
In the meantime, right now we have a global emergency just to get the CO2 out of the atmosphere into a solid form as fast as possible.
I'm working on it. See link above.
Thanks, that was great, good luck!
Plants are near 100% efficient at photosynthesis. And the main reason is because they are green. Manganese's and or stainless steal make excellent catalysts and they are abundant.
You do realize he noted how ineffective plants are at producing energy?
So when will this biomimmicry process be made into working systems?
Great and inspiring talk by Professor Hill. Thank you!
Time developing all this tech which is expensive and dificult instead every year more tons of co2 are introduced in the air which it would be difficult to transform all of it look at co2 scales that we are putting each year on the atmosphere and all the stuff, but we try....
do the G.M.O. can help ?
Can we make oxygen and possibly nitrogen at an excelorated rate using synthetic photosynthesis?
Bro is confused☠️
Now.. How did the plants figure this out...???!!!
What if these molecular machines keep on producing fuel for millions of years, uncontrollably? How to stop these machines before we switch them on, in excitment?
What I do not understand is if it is so amazing the invention like that than why aren't we using it now? We still have a problem with fossil fuels!!! Is it because the big companies don't want to use it because they would have to change everything like teaching people to use the new technology and fixing it if necessary, do new marketing or they just don't know if the new product would be acepted by consumers??
Tell me were to invest ...
"where" not "were"
The Ultimate Reductionist wear
HYSR
Simply invest in masks, a pandemic is on its way !!!
This guy might be the future ill come back in 10 years
Doesn’t this still alter the atmosphere
I think Panasonic has done that
Lithium peroxide:
2LiO2 + 2CO2 =2LiC03 + 02
its been 4 years .where is your photosynthesis machine
8 years later, year 2021, what happened to this?
Well, dunno of Dr. Adam Hill's lab. But catalytic breakdown of CO2 and H2O to things like CH4 using sunlight is going well. A few of this tech. are preparing to leave lab as well. One such is done in ETH. You can see it by searching: "Carbon-neutral fuel made from sunlight and air".
His explanation is too long
For some folks, life also is WAY too long.. . . And why working and owning all those things you have to leave when dying ? "Its all so meaningless" (Frederic Nietzsche )
Terrible TED talk. Great idea, boring middle, skip to last 30 seconds. Fails to mention what's next and if it's practical.
Could this possibly clean air to make it more breathable in some areas around the world as it produces energy? It sounds very interesting and I would like to know more about artificial photosynthesis.
Michael Rubino If you buried the fuel instead of using it.
Lithium peroxide: 2LiO2 + 2CO2 =2LiC03 + 02
It won't. For example, 4 yrs past, the outcome of this research is yet to be delivered. So, if u want clean air and healthy living, preserve the already existing ecosystems and let them thrive. Given all the high-tech stuff like GPS and Machine learning, it should be rather easy.
@@aniksamiurrahman6365 i don't think pointing to Machine Learning is a great comparison as someone who works in the field. It's still wildly volatile and its usage for this task would be incredibly energy demanding and would ultimately increase carbon pollution rather than decrease it, beyond the monumental and nightmarish task of data pipelining something that obscure and specific to a given ecosystem.
@@bearsaremonkeys Every research work is like that. So, by this logic, we should stop doing research altogether. Gaud, u shud tell that to your CEO and get to upper management fast.
What I'm saying is that, we've better tools, if goodwill was there, we ud've found possible solution to many of them already.
This has to be one of those things that is a great thing with bad messaging :(
50 years ago I made a study to find how much quantity of mineral compounds exist in one liter of Paint of rival producers... through electroscopy in IR fields...using a KBr... crysthal...and that was a "revolution" in that Industry... just guess... )))
updates?
whats the end goal.. ok you have some acid .. what next ?
is the end product still going to produce co2 .. so many unanswered questions.
Depending on what purpose you will utilize Formic Acid, you may not end up with CO2 release to the atmosphere. Even if you release CO2 you will reduce the same number of moles of CO2 through AP to obtain formic acid. The main purpose is clear and it is to utilize solar energy to get solar fuels as a substitution of utilizing fossil fuels.
it doesn't matter if the end product produces co2 or not, if it consumes it when being produced, same happens in nature, we produce co2 when we consume energy, while plants consume that co2 to produce energy for us, it creates balance
No, we breathe in oxygen an out carbon dioxide, also released from useing fossel fuel, coal, oil and such all create the co2 green house gas, traping the suns heat and thining our ozone layer that's all contributing to global warming
making our earth warm and every day it increases, so captivating the hazard and puting it to use via replacing the greatest cause with the solutions. Bravo to all involved an how can we help?
End goal is to save the only planet in our solersystem capabale of sustaining life ( the only planet we can live on)(the only one that has water! Note *0.002% of wuch is drinkable thankyou) saving everyone's mother our earth our home. What is the goal, ummmm???
Also just so the world can note cannabis or pot pulls in 10x the co2 a tree does and puts out 10x the oxygen, but is agenst the law to grow because the use of it(smoking it) in Caucasian woman incresses there desires to sleep with African American men ( Fed's decision, to emphasize the banning of in the US .
I am impressed with the concept of artificial photosynthesis, the idea of creating a means for humans to gain is, as always, the first course to follow and act upon. I also feel the concept and configuration should be of a new thought process, out of the box. I have a RGF system operating in a brackish water canal that has tide effects. This small Rough Gravel Filtration system has magnified all aspects of life in this area, fish, fiddler crabs, mullet minnows, tarpon, birds, cranes, Red Headed woodpeckers, butterflies, etc. This small system has magnified life, algae, water is filtered by enhancing natures own process I feel that utilizing our thoughts into assisting nature by enhancing natures abilities to sustain the damage we present and will continue to present is the answer we seek. A better way to describe this in common terms is to stop treating nature as an opponent and give nature steroids to match our demands, we compensate assistance as required as to not surpass our needs and become subject to consequences of over production complications. We have lessoned Natures abilities to sustain the impact but, we are qualified to enhance natures abilities in all regards and magnify Natures abilities to match our demands by plant, by canal etc. etc. etc. By moving our thought to administering idealism into enhancing and magnifying natures abilities to match our demand as an Allie rather than a foe, we will find answers that have been right in front of us since the beginning
tooo bad for the toxicity levels of cobalt
Fascinating and monumental! And a complex matter well presented.
Sources?
Hate learning stuff like this at school, its just too confusing for me lul
i am lost here... how heterobimettalic catalyst will act to change co2 to formic acid?
The electron from Co will react with CO2 to form a version of CO2 which is highly reactive. This reactive molecule can react with (I think water?) to form the acid.