United States Patent: 3984530
The title, as below, of this US Patent, more than 33 years old, is a little misleading.
And, from our perspective, the point of the whole thing is ridiculous, and highlights how practical solutions to our critical needs for conventional, and still versatile, forms of energy have been shunted aside by what we must presume to be political agendas.
Although this patent does tell you how to make Hydrogen, out of Methane and Methanol, for whatever futuristic moon-beam purpose, it first tells us how to make the valuable liquid fuel and, as in ExxonMobil's "MTG"(r) process, gasoline raw material, Methanol, out of Methane and water.
We excerpt, with comment following, only a very brief portion of the text:
"Methane-methanol cycle for the thermochemical production of hydrogen - United States Patent 3,984,530
Date: October 5, 1976
Inventors: Robert Dreyfuss, Mount Vernon, NY, and Robert Hickman, Livermore, CA
Assignee: The United States of America
Abstract:
1. A thermochemical process cycle for the production of hydrogen from water comprising the steps of:
a. reacting methane with water under conditions to produce carbon monoxide and hydrogen, the amount of hydrogen produced being in excess of that required to convert the carbon monoxide to methanol;
b. recovering the excess hydrogen as product hydrogen;
c. reacting the remaining hydrogen with the carbon monoxide under conditions to produce methanol;
d. reacting the methanol with a metal oxide and sulfur dioxide under conditions to produce the corresponding metal sulfate and regenerate methane."
----------
We will not excerpt more of the lengthy patent document, and it's "start with Methane, end with Methane" merry-go-round.
Why, we must ask, after you had reacted "hydrogen with the carbon monoxide ... to ... produce methanol", would you want to convert that Methanol, by "reacting ... (it) ... with a metal oxide and sulfur dioxide" back into Methane, instead of using that Methanol as a liquid fuel or converting it into gasoline?
You wouldn't - unless you really didn't want to, or were told not to; and, were instructed that the only goal was "recovering the excess hydrogen as product hydrogen".
We have no choice but to suspect these researchers - at the US DOE's Lawrence Livermore and Brookhaven National Laboratories - were so told and instructed.
One phrase is compelling: "More specifically, it is an object of the present invention to provide a methane-methanol reaction cycle for the production of hydrogen wherein the net reaction is the decomposition of water into hydrogen and oxygen."
Hydrogen was their "object", and that's what they went after, seemingly oblivious to practical alternatives.
But, a gaseous blend of "carbon monoxide and hydrogen" is nothing more than synthesis gas, "syngas", which can itself be catalyzed via Fischer-Tropsch, and related, technology into liquid fuels, including Methanol, without further ado.
These US Government scientists somehow overlooked that fact.
And, remember that the needed Methane can itself be synthesized via the Sabatier-type recycling of Carbon Dioxide, or via the steam gasification of Coal.
These US Government scientists somehow overlooked those facts, as well.
Why? We have a right to know. Our tax dollars paid for the R&D; and, we, the People, own the patent rights.