Talk:Biological hydrogen production (algae)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Changing focus[edit]

Instead of focusing on algea, this should be an article that includes:

Germany, more info[edit]

A course on how to do it Ruhr University Bochum. and the project "biomimetischen Produktion von Wasserstoff". Institute of Molecular Bioscience University of Queensland Brisbane and Bielefeld University is doing research on stm6. For Karlsruhe, The technical Universität Karlsruhe (TH) is doing the bioreaktors Source. Cheers. Mion 12:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A bioreactor in Chemnitz. [1] Mion 12:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Made it less cheery[edit]

Look, I changed the wording around to make it a little more realistic. To say that it would an area the size of Texas would be "sufficient" to supply world with hyrdogen is extremely glib. Change it back if you want but tone it down a little. The original author wrote it as if it's simply a matter of "planting" algae instead of soya beans. Please!

Ddwalter 10:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)DwaltersMIA[reply]


Please read with "Changing Focus" at the same time for the following:

Since production of hydrogen by Algae is not the only biological production method, stating the size required may cause misunderstanding and misleading as other biological production methods does not have to be light dependent so land surface require would vary. A standardised presentation, for example: "64mL H2/(h L)" (My understanding is 64ml H2 per hour per litre) is preferable for comparison across Algae & bacteria &/or other production methods.

But I do agree providing some sort of real life example would help, but not enough information yet. Kadther (talk) 12:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Intro[edit]

In the late 1990s it was discovered that if algae are deprived of sulfur they will switch from the production of oxygen, as in normal photosynthesis, to the production of hydrogen.

Which algae? Chlamydomonas reinhardtii as per below? This statement suggests a generalization for all algae, which may not be the case, considering that the algae represent many independent evolutionary origins. In addition, the citation for this should be moved up to the intro, i.e. the first mention in the article of this research.--♦♦♦Vlmastra♦♦♦ (talk) 17:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milestones[edit]

I would like to point out a confusing part of this article.

2006 - Unpublished work from the University of California at Berkeley-(The program is done by Midwest Research Institute, the operating contractor for NREL)- may have brought the technology past the economically viable 10 percent efficiency level. By shortening the chlorophyll stacks in the photosynthetic organelles, Anastasios Melis has "probably" passed the threshold.[4] [5]

The results have not brought the technology past the economically viable 10 percent efficiency level and neither has the 15% achievment.

"2007 - Anastasios Melis achieved 15 % [6]" is ambigious. 15% of what? My colleague visited with Mike Seibert at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and they only achieve 1% efficiency for the total production. To clarify this discrepency I emailed Dr Melis and he indicated the 15% efficiency relates to "solar-to-chemical conversion efficiency" which describes the efficiency of algae to absorb light and break appart water molecules into oxygen, electrons and protons.

"NREL reports on solar-to-hydrogen conversion efficiency, E(H2). The theoretical maximum E(H2) = 12%, assuming a prior improvement of the E(hv) from 3% --> 30%." -Melis

My concern is the lay reader if they see the DOE target efficiency to make it economically viable is 10%, they might think it has been achieved. It is important to convey that Dr Melis has improved efficency in Photosystem II while another major bottleneck is proton reduction using Hydrogenases where the build up of oxygen inhibits enzyme activity.

Consider an alternative way of saying this.

2007 - Anastasios Melis achieved 15 % solar-to-chemical conversion efficiency[6] the first step in solar-to-hydrogen conversion efficiency

Also consider taking out the 2006 milestone on unpublished work. 144.171.126.227 (talk) 16:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackygrahamez (talk • contribs) 13:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to edit the article yourself to improve it. Mion (talk) 13:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The milestones represent well intentioned editing but crossed the line into "synthesis" where an editor is inventing history and assigning priorities. This kind of thing invited abuse (why isnt my breakthrough on the milestone list???). So I removed it.--Smokefoot (talk) 16:42, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

naming[edit]

i'm restoring the old naming back from Biohydrogen reactor to Biological hydrogen production (Algae). Similar as you wont rename speeddriving to car because you use a car as a tool, the article is about hydrogen production with Algae, also there are more Biohydrogen methods that use a reactor. Mion (talk) 15:01, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Biological hydrogen production (algae). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

The article is not very strong and the anchor article Biohydrogen is also needful of work. I suggestion that the good content be put into biohydrogen and then after that article is OK, we see if there is content to justify the many manifestations of biohydrogen. --Smokefoot (talk) 16:42, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  checkY Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 11:34, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Biological_hydrogen_production_(algae)&oldid=1173613079"