INVESTIGATION OF HYDROGEN GAS PRODUCTION USING COPPER AND STAINLESS-STEEL ELECTRODES WITH VARIED ELECTRICAL CURRENT AND NaOH CATALYST CONCENTRATION :

Sugeng Hadi Susilo; Gumono Gumono; Agus Setiawan

doi:10.5937/jaes0-45549

Sugeng Hadi Susilo State Polytechnic of Malang, Department Mechanical, Engineering, Malang, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3077-2039
Gumono State Polytechnic of Malang, Department Mechanical, Engineering, Malang, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3550-4009
Agus Setiawan State Polytechnic of Malang, Department Mechanical, Engineering, Malang, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2817-5502

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/jaes0-45549

Keywords: hydrogen gas, electrical current, NaOH catalyst concentration

Abstract

In recent years, the global energy demand, particularly the usage of fossil fuels as motor vehicle propellants such as gasoline and diesel, had steadily increased. This surge in consumption, alongside the burgeoning vehicle count, resulted in a depletion of petroleum reserves. Consequently, exploring alternative fuel sources became imperative. Hydrogen gas, derived from water through water electrolysis using an HHO generator, emerged as a promising alternative. This research investigated the impact of diverse copper and stainless-steel electrodes in varied electrolyte solutions and electrical currents for generating HHO gas. Employing an experimental methodology, the study modified an existing HHO generator, reassembling it with different materials based on the experimental design. Subsequent testing and data collection revealed that the highest flow rate of HHO gas, at 0.000807564 m³/s, occurred using stainless-steel electrodes with an electrical current of 50 A and a 50% NaOH concentration. The study concluded that the size of the electric current and the amount of NaOH significantly influenced the speed of HHO gas flow, indicating a direct relationship between these factors and gas production.

References

Ahmadi, P. and Khoshnevisan, A. (2022). Dynamic simulation and lifecycle assessment of hydrogen fuel cell electricvehicles considering various hydrogen production methods. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 47, no. 62, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.06.215.

Ahmed, K. W., Jang, M. J., Park, M. G., Chen,Z. and Fowler, M. (2022). Effect of Components and Operating Conditions on the Performance of PEM Electrolyzers: A Review. Electrochem, vol. 3, no. 4, doi: 10.3390/electrochem3040040.

Al-Breiki, M. and Bicer, Y. (2021). Comparative life cycle assessment of sustainable energy carriers including production, storage, overseas transport and utilization. J. Clean. Prod., vol. 279, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123481.

Al-Qahtani, A., Parkinson, B., Hellgardt, K., Shah, N. and Guillen-Gosalbez, G. (2021). Uncovering the true cost of hydrogen production routes using life cycle monetisation. Appl. Energy, vol. 281, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115958.

Susilo, S. H. and Setiawan, A. (2021). Analysis of the number and angle of the impeller blade to the performance of centrifugal pump,” EUREKA, Phys. Eng., vol. 2021, no. 5, doi: 10.21303/2461-4262.2021.002001.

Amikam, G., Fridman-Bishop, N. and Gendel,Y. (2020). Biochar-Assisted Iron-Mediated Water Electrolysis Process for Hydrogen Production. ACS Omega, vol. 5, no. 49, doi: 10.1021/acsomega.0c04820.

Antonini, C., Treyer, K., Moioli, E., Bauer, C., Schildhauer, T. J. and Mazzotti, M. (2021). Hydrogen from wood gasification with CCS-a techno-environmental analysis of production and use as transport fuel. Sustain. Energy Fuels, vol. 5, no. 10, doi: 10.1039/d0se01637c.

M. I. Aydin and I. Dincer, “A life cycle impact analysis of various hydrogen production methods for public transportation sector,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 47, no. 93, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.09.125.

Aziz, F. A., Rustana, C. E. and Fahdiran, R. (2022). Study of Electrode Lifespan in Seawater Electrolysis Process to Produce Hydrogen Gas,” J. Neutrino, vol. 14, no. 2, 2022, doi: 10.18860/neu.v14i2.15218.

Azwar, Muslim, A., Mukhlishien, Jakfar, and Zanil, M. F. (2020). Automation of Bio-Hydrogen Gas Production in a Fed-Batch Microbial Electrolysis Cell Reactor by using Internal Model Control of Neural Network. J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci., vol. 67, no. 2.

Wicaksono, H., Susilo, S. H. and Pranoto, B. (2021). Numerical study of co emission reaction in CO2 diluted biogas and oxy-fuel premixed combustion. J. Eng. Sci. Technol., vol. 16, no. 6.

Bampaou, M. et al., (2021). Integration of renewable hydrogen production in steelworks off-gases for the synthesis of methanol and methane. Energies, vol. 14, no. 10, doi: 10.3390/en14102904.

Bayrak Pehlivan, İ., Atak, G., Niklasson, G. A. Stolt, L., Edoff, M. and Edvinsson, T. (2021). Electrochromic solar water splitting using a cathodic WO3 electrocatalyst. Nano Energy, vol. 81, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2020.105620.

Bespalko, S. and Mizeraczyk, J. (2022). Energy Balance of Hydrogen Production in the Cathodic Regime of Plasma-Driven Solution Electrolysis of Na2CO3 Aqueous Solution with Argon Carrier Gas. Energies, vol. 15, no. 24, doi: 10.3390/en15249431.

Susilo, S. H., Asrori A. and Gumono, G. (2021). Analysis of the Effect of Stirrer and Container Rotation Direction on Mixing Index (Ip), Eastern-European J. Enterp. Technol., vol. 3, no.1 (111), doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2021.233062.

Bhaskar, A., Assadi,M. and Somehsaraei, H. N. (2020). Decarbonization of the iron and steel industry with direct reduction of iron ore with green hydrogen. Energies, vol. 13, no. 3, doi: 10.3390/en13030758.

Bicer, Y. and Khalid, F. (2020). Life cycle environmental impact comparison of solid oxide fuel cells fueled by natural gas, hydrogen, ammonia and methanol for combined heat and power generation. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 45, no. 5, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.11.122.

Buffi, M., Prussi, M. and Scarlat, N. (2022). Energy and environmental assessment of hydrogen from biomass sources: Challenges and perspectives. Biomass and Bioenergy, vol. 165, doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2022.106556.

Carlotta-Jones, D. I., Purdy, K., Kirwan, K., Stratford,J. and Coles, S. R. (2020). Improved hydrogen gas production in microbial electrolysis cells using inexpensive recycled carbon fibre fabrics. Bioresour. Technol., vol. 304, doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2020.122983.

Chen, Y. J., Li, Y. H. and Chen, C. Y. (2022). Studying the Effect of Electrode Material and Magnetic Field on Hydrogen Production Efficiency. Magnetochemistry, vol. 8, no. 5, doi: 10.3390/magnetochemistry8050053.

Susilo, S. H. and Wicaksono,H. (2021). Numerical analysis of nox formation in co2 diluted biogas premixed combustion. EUREKA, Phys. Eng., vol. 2021, no. 6, doi: 10.21303/2461-4262.2021.002072

Guo, H., Kim, H. J. and Kim, S. Y. (2023). Research on Hydrogen Production by Water Electrolysis Using a Rotating Magnetic Field. Energies, vol. 16, no. 1, doi: 10.3390/en16010086.

He, G., Mallapragada, D. S., Bose, A., Heuberger, C. F. and Gencer, E. (2021). Hydrogen supply chain planning with flexible transmission and storage scheduling. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 12, no. 3, doi: 10.1109/TSTE.2021.3064015.

Prayitno,P., Rulianah, S., Zamrudy, W. and Susilo,S. H. (2021). An Analysis of Performance of An Anaerobic Fixed Film Biofilter (Anf2b) Reactor In Treatment Of Cassava Wastewater. Eastern-European J. Enterp. Technol., vol. 1, no. 10–109, doi: 10.15587/1729-4061.2021.225324.

Hren, R., Vujanović, A., Van Fan, Y., Klemeš, J. J., Krajnc, D., and Čuček, L. (2023). Hydrogen production, storage and transport for renewable energy and chemicals: An environmental footprint assessment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 173, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.113113.