The whole problem with this is the double wammy imposed by the laws of Physics.

It's bad enough that solar power is limited by the laws of Physics due to such mechanisms as the "quantum limit", "charge-carrier recombination",... and other effects that no technology can get around; because they are effects of basic physical laws.

Schemes like those discussed can help minimize the effects of charge-carrier recombination; but can't eliminate it. Even this scheme must obey the limit imposed by physical law.

Counter to the claim in the thread title; this "breakthrough" has NOTHING to do with energy storage. It is merely a way to get electricity as efficiently as possible while minimizing charge-carrier recombination.

It doesn't say ANYTHING at ALL about storage of energy for the several hours that a solar facility would need to store energy at night until it can see the Sun again.

PamW

If you've separated hydrogen from oxygen, you can get the energy back anytime you like (barring leaks) in a fuel cell or by combustion (subject to losses, of course).

Did you read the article? Yes, there's hype - this is basic research and not something that's going to be producing power next week or next year, from a source whose mission is to promote the Technion Institute. The promise of the method is twofold: potential use of iron oxide in place of more expensive (and toxic) materials, and the built-in ability to store the harvested energy that efficient electrolysis promises to provide (exactly what you gripe about in boldface ALL CAPS).

Yes - I read the article; and it's not talking about improved energy storage.

It's talking about the physics that is going on during the time the solar cell is "harvesting" or collecting the free electrons liberated by the solar energy. The place where they've made improvements is not in energy storage; but in harvesting electrons more efficiently which gives you more energy to store. But that's not the problem with energy storage.

Electrolysis certainly is energy storage. The problem is that when you store energy via electrolysis; you can't get it all back. The laws of physics put limits on how much of the energy that you store, that you can get back. That's where the true problem with energy storage lies.

You and the other non-scientists here have to learn that there are certain physical limits that we will never get around. Scientists know we can't get around them, so we don't even try.

Whenever we "invent" a technology, we are devising a technique so that Mother Nature does our bidding for us. The problem is that there are limits that Mother Nature herself obeys. So when we use Mother Nature to do our bidding, we are constrained by the same limits that Mother Nature herself obeys.

That's why it is nonsensical when someone posts some article about some pseudo-scientists that are "getting around" these fundamental physical limits. The laws of physics just plain don't let us get around those limits.

Therefore, someone who claims to be getting around the limits is selling "snake oil".

PamW

You seem incapable of understanding even your own posts. When you write,

...that the scientists who are responsible for this research do not understand the laws of Physics? The research cited does not claim to "eliminate" any physical laws, in spite of your insinuations to the contrary. They claim to improve efficiencies, which is what engineers in general try to do when devising systems to capture / store / generate electrical power.

Or is it your claim that we have already realized any and all efficiencies that can be had with solar energy? That there are no breakthroughs to be had, so anyone who claims a breakthrough is (a) scientifically ignorant or (b) lying through their teeth?

Hey I've got an idea: Why don't you just write up a boilerplate response that starts with: "Only nuclear power can POSSIBLY solve our energy problems, and this latest [solar | wind | geothermal | whatever...] scheme CANNOT work and those so-called scientists don't understand the Basic Laws Of Physics (unlike ME), and you the poster are Obviously Not A Scientist because you have the NERVE to post articles about Solar Energy research here in the Environment & Energy Forum and worse, you don't blindly accept every claim that I make."

Or better yet, why don't you GET OVER YOURSELF and try not to TALK DOWN TO your fellow E&E boardsters, most of whom really do understand there are physical laws, and all of whom sincerely want to press on towards energy SOLUTIONS.

Most of the posters here have repeatedly demonstrated that they do NOT understand the limits posed by the Laws of Physics. They are always touting some so-called "breakthrough" that VIOLATES the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, or the "quantum efficiency limit" on solar panels, or "Betz's Law" for wind turbines.

Additionally, I don't have to write up a response that says "only nuclear power can solve our energy problem"; as the scientists of the National Academy of Science and Engineering" have already reached that conclusion.

The problem is the denizens of this forum that would rather listen to the snake oil of people saying they have made an "end run" around the Laws of Physics"; rather than listen to the National Academy.

PamW