Newly discovered enzyme that turns air into electricity, providing a new clean source of energy

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.

Click here to see all the comments (13).

[–] • 3 pts

The enzyme comes from various bacteria, enzyme is called Huc and it's being extracted from a bacterium with a funny name: Mycobacterium smegmatis.

Supposedly Huc directly converts hydrogen gas to electrical current.

A few key things to consider: you can't convert atoms to energy without a nuclear blast, though you can capitalize on ionic bonds to steal some charge while creating a chemical bond. Meaning huc wil make electricity for a little but should get bound up by hydrogen bonds and become inert, what is strange is that we found a pathway to subvert glucose storage as a way to fuel cells, if we engineered this huc organelles properly we could probably put it into humans as a sort of additional powerhouse meaning humans would need fewer calories of food intake but that's some out there science.

An electrician will need to take a look at the isolated enzyme to make a volume equation for energy efficiency and that and depending in synthesis costs is where this will live and die I bet and don't expect iterative improvements when dealing with this concept unless we can make the huc organelle independent from the bacterium. Essentially this would be a liquid fuel situation but not a combustion fuel so you would fill up an electric car with huc and maybe you could reduce the volume or quality of battery needed stretching out the rare earth supply.

Pollution angle: atmospheric carbon and methane fall out of the atmosphere as hydrocarbons, meaning they need hydrogen to bond to and low hydrogen availability in the upper atmosphere means it's already an inefficient process so cutting hydrogen production on the surface would just make atmospheric carbon retention worse. This wont be a "green" technology until we are carbon negative. Conversely we could solve a whole lot of our carbon retention by dumping shitloads of hydrogen into the upper atmosphere just below the boundary layers for carbon and methane retention. Or just creating energy efficient hydrogen production at the surface while expanding grass lands and sea grasses. Trying to moderate carbon on the human end past where we already are is inefficient.

I wrote a lot of the pollution angle from the leftist climate religion perspective but don't assume that means I'm promoting it or believe it as such just establishing that huc should be inconsistent with their viewpoint unless it is hyper efficient or could meaningfully be used to make all electric by 2030 work by spreading rare earths more efficiently.

The enzyme comes from various bacteria, enzyme is called Huc and it's being extracted from a bacterium with a funny name: Mycobacterium smegmatis. Supposedly Huc directly converts hydrogen gas to electrical current. A few key things to consider: you can't convert atoms to energy without a nuclear blast, though you can capitalize on ionic bonds to steal some charge while creating a chemical bond. Meaning huc wil make electricity for a little but should get bound up by hydrogen bonds and become inert, what is strange is that we found a pathway to subvert glucose storage as a way to fuel cells, if we engineered this huc organelles properly we could probably put it into humans as a sort of additional powerhouse meaning humans would need fewer calories of food intake but that's some out there science. An electrician will need to take a look at the isolated enzyme to make a volume equation for energy efficiency and that and depending in synthesis costs is where this will live and die I bet and don't expect iterative improvements when dealing with this concept unless we can make the huc organelle independent from the bacterium. Essentially this would be a liquid fuel situation but not a combustion fuel so you would fill up an electric car with huc and maybe you could reduce the volume or quality of battery needed stretching out the rare earth supply. Pollution angle: atmospheric carbon and methane fall out of the atmosphere as hydrocarbons, meaning they need hydrogen to bond to and low hydrogen availability in the upper atmosphere means it's already an inefficient process so cutting hydrogen production on the surface would just make atmospheric carbon retention worse. This wont be a "green" technology until we are carbon negative. Conversely we could solve a whole lot of our carbon retention by dumping shitloads of hydrogen into the upper atmosphere just below the boundary layers for carbon and methane retention. Or just creating energy efficient hydrogen production at the surface while expanding grass lands and sea grasses. Trying to moderate carbon on the human end past where we already are is inefficient. I wrote a lot of the pollution angle from the leftist climate religion perspective but don't assume that means I'm promoting it or believe it as such just establishing that huc should be inconsistent with their viewpoint unless it is hyper efficient or could meaningfully be used to make all electric by 2030 work by spreading rare earths more efficiently.

link