Scientists Create World’s 1st Practical Artificial Leaf, 10X as Efficient as the Real

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by Itse

That's true. However, this is not your typical Fox News -type hype over some garage genius. Just look at the list of people involved, those are some genuine top experts in the field, including major industrial players.

I'm pretty sure they've got large parts of the technology down. Of course that doesn't mean it's going to be all it's promised to be (almost certainly not, because real life is always surpisingly complicated), and it doesn't mean they will get the final technical problems solved to make this a viable technology, but I'm relatively comfortable thinking that this isn't "bunk", meaning "there's no way this is going to work".

Also, there's also a lot of technologies that people were sceptical about but a few years later they're so commonplace nobody even remembers that. For example there was still a lot of scepticism towards touchscreens a decade ago.

Media glorifies new findings prematurely way too often. Certainly some turn out, but not nearly as well as when they're first picked up in the news. I see a lot of this in the human and exercise physiology field, and a lot of big conclusions from studies that don't warrant them.

It bothers me how much people are misinformed just to get some readers/viewers.

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

Media glorifies new findings prematurely way too often. Certainly some turn out, but not nearly as well as when they're first picked up in the news. I see a lot of this in the human and exercise physiology field, and a lot of big conclusions from studies that don't warrant them.

It bothers me how much people are misinformed just to get some readers/viewers.

As an informed person in Dr. Nocera's work I can assure you that this is a legitimate finding. I'm not saying that this technology is the be all and end all, but this isn't being developed by some guy in his garage. Dr. Nocera has the experience, training, facilities, funding and experienced team members to truly make an impact. He isn't some whack job.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Itse

That's true. However, this is not your typical Fox News -type hype over some garage genius. Just look at the list of people involved, those are some genuine top experts in the field, including major industrial players.

I'm pretty sure they've got large parts of the technology down. Of course that doesn't mean it's going to be all it's promised to be (almost certainly not, because real life is always surpisingly complicated), and it doesn't mean they will get the final technical problems solved to make this a viable technology, but I'm relatively comfortable thinking that this isn't "bunk", meaning "there's no way this is going to work".

Also, there's also a lot of technologies that people were sceptical about but a few years later they're so commonplace nobody even remembers that. For example there was still a lot of scepticism towards touchscreens a decade ago.

HHO doesn't even exist as a gas... and Hydrogen and Oxygen mixed as a welding torch does work as a welding torch, but there's nothing magical about that.

Most of the video is complete baloney, water isn't a fuel, and cannot be. If you split water into oxygen and hydrogen and then run the car off the hydrogen, the water isn't a fuel, it's an energy storage mechanism, all you've done is created a VERY inefficient electric car.

Yes there's technologies that people were sceptical about, however touchscreens didn't violate laws of energy conservation and thermodynamics.

This HHO gas scam has been around for a long time, yet no one's demonstrated that it has any properties, chemically or otherwise, that aren't already understood. Especially not magically creating energy out of nothing.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

As an informed person in Dr. Nocera's work I can assure you that this is a legitimate finding.

He was probably talking about the HHO gas mumbo-jumbo.

And I think he has a valid point, and I'd even go further, it's not just the media giving too much attention to the cranks to get viewers, these cranks bilk people out of hard earned money. Getting people to invest in new magic sources of energy that will revolutionize the world is a time honoured scam.

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by photon

He was probably talking about the HHO gas mumbo-jumbo.

And I think he has a valid point, and I'd even go further, it's not just the media giving too much attention to the cranks to get viewers, these cranks bilk people out of hard earned money. Getting people to invest in new magic sources of energy that will revolutionize the world is a time honoured scam.

I'm not disputing the HHO junk (ie. that guy in his garage), I remember ripping it apart several years ago.

I'm just saying that comparing Dr. Nocera to these charlatans is way too extreme (if in fact anyone is comparing him. . .I can't even tell anymore).

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

As an informed person in Dr. Nocera's work I can assure you that this is a legitimate finding. I'm not saying that this technology is the be all and end all, but this isn't being developed by some guy in his garage. Dr. Nocera has the experience, training, facilities, funding and experienced team members to truly make an impact. He isn't some whack job.

That's another problem. I would love to hear about major findings from impact researchers, but I can't use the mass media to do this!

I have to read the actual scientific papers (assuming I can find them) which, like in this case, are sometimes not in my field of understanding and therefore I don't get everything from them that I should. I count on articles and media to decipher findings for me, but they are far from reliable, as was the case for this article.

[photon]

Yeah I'd definitely agree the comparison of Dr. Nocera to HHO gas man wouldn't be valid.

[Canada 02]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

That's another problem. I would love to hear about major findings from impact researchers, but I can't use the mass media to do this!

I have to read the actual scientific papers (assuming I can find them) which, like in this case, are sometimes not in my field of understanding and therefore I don't get everything from them that I should. I count on articles and media to decipher findings for me, but they are far from reliable, as was the case for this article.

here are some articles from the scientific media discussing Nocera's recent ACS lecture

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/33...5-fc9ac1d0d4c4

http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegrea...irst_prac.html