Since the "energy-storage" within the chlorate, by the usual chlorate cell, is at least 50 % and can be made much higher:
==> Can that energy can be gotten back ?
The melting-point is only 248 [Celsius], probably increasing with the decomp-NaCl-%age, and the chlorate can be shipped !
If there were a way to get the electricity back from the chlorate, then the use of wind-energy could be made more efficient ...
[Edited on 25-10-2008 by chief]12AX7 - 25-10-2008 at 09:06
You could reverse the reaction by putting back in the hydrogen that you removed. I suppose two platinum electrodes, one with hydrogen bubbled over
it, would generate some voltage.
In lieu of hydrogen, zinc might be workable. It would have to be alkaline, since acid doesn't get along well with chlorate. Zinc hydroxide would gel
around the anode, reducing the diffusion rate of chlorate. This is solved, in dry and alkaline cells, by letting it produce hydrogen, and oxidizing
the hydrogen on MnO2 (which makes voltage somehow for some reason in the process). But that probably won't work as well in a chlorate-solution cell.
Maybe if you add a dispersion of platinum black...
Timkclo4 - 25-10-2008 at 12:19
Quote:
Originally posted by chief
If there were a way to get the electricity back from the chlorate, then the use of wind-energy could be made more efficient ...
[Edited on 25-10-2008 by chief]
Could you please explain what you mean by this? Its very confusing to me.. since I know of no connection between chlorates and wind mills.
Are you saying to use the electricity from the turbines to do electrolysis to form chlorate, and then let off the energy from the chlorate to turn it
back into usable energy?
I doubt that would be practical.
Although, It might be cool to make your own battery with this method.not_important - 25-10-2008 at 23:45
Not too practical because of the inefficiency in making chlorate; there may be a similar efficiency problem extracting that energy too. Remember that
batteries based on an oxidiser will require something to be oxidised, too, unless you can reverse the formation process. As that also release hydrogen
that would need to be captured and feed back into the reverse cell, and H2 is a bother to store and transport, that doesn't seem to be attractive.
Note that UHVDC transmission lines are more efficient than transporting bulk solids over the same distance; losses under 2% over 2000 km are
practical.
