31
Engineers slash iridium use in electrolyzer catalyst by 80%, boosting path to affordable green hydrogen (news.rice.edu)
submitted 5 days ago by Powderhorn@beehaw.org to c/science@beehaw.org
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In the global race to decarbonize, hydrogen stands out as one of the most promising clean fuels. But despite its potential to power industries and transportation without emitting carbon, producing hydrogen sustainably in a water electrolyzer has been limited by the high cost and scarcity of one critical ingredient: iridium.

Now, a team of researchers at Rice University has developed a new catalyst that dramatically reduces the amount of iridium needed in proton exchange membrane (PEM) water electrolyzers, a key technology for generating green hydrogen from water. Their innovation — an iridium-stabilized ruthenium oxide catalyst that uses just one-sixth as much iridium as conventional systems — maintains industrial-level performance for more than 1,500 hours of continuous operation. The research was recently published in Nature Nanotechnology.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MotoAsh@piefed.social 6 points 5 days ago

Salt batteries already exist and are commercialized. They just suck for vehicles and other energy-dense needs because their voltage drops slowly as they discharge. Lithium holds a strong voltage until it's about done.

That might not sound significant, but not only does it directly cut nearly in half the available power, it also greatly effects situations where lots of power is needed. If you need as many watts as the battery can only safely supply down to 60%, then you only have effective access to 40% of a battery that's already smaller capacity in the first place.

[-] mistermodal@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 days ago

That is what I assumed. Figured it would mainly replace stationary power storage where energy density matters less. Hasn't stopped them rolling out sodium-ion scooters. I would have assumed that was just too tiny.

[-] MotoAsh@piefed.social 5 points 5 days ago

Yea, it's definitely not bad for stationary storage, at least when compensating for the current limits as the charge drops.

[-] randomwords@midwest.social 0 points 3 days ago
[-] MotoAsh@piefed.social 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

You mean a company who's wallet depends on making it sound better than reality would claim it's better than reality?!

I'm shocked.

There is ALWAYS a "better" battery coming down the pipe. Always. To say no NEW technology couldn't work is an assumption, but so is assuming those new designs will deliver and be commercially as cheap.

The point still stands that a battery tech for vehicles needs to be power dense and as light as possible. Right now, salt batteries are MUCH worse than other tech. To say that salt batteries will win in the end is as dumb as saying the horse with a gimp will totally win the race after more training.

Even if the horse did have the potential, you don't know other horses' potentials nor do you know what other contenders will arise in the mean time.

this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2025
31 points (100.0% liked)

Science

14525 readers
22 users here now

Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
Gaywallet@beehaw.org
remington@beehaw.org