Why not just use photoelectric cells to generate electricity to split the water molecule? The primary drawback to things like photoelectric and wind power is that they’re unreliable. But with this type of process you don’t need 100 percent reliability because the end product is storable. The same would apply to nuclear power. If people find it so objectionable in their backyards, put the generators in places where no one lives and use them exclusively as an energy source for producing storable synthetic fuels.
True enough. Or let wind turbines and solar collect CO2 out of the atmosphere and liquify it to store underground - and this would “cleanse” our nat gas and coal plants. Incorporating unreliable power into the grid is more expensive than it is worth.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics says you have to pay entropy its due with each conversion of energy from one form to another. I think generating hydrogen in situ is more efficient. The question is cost, IMHO.
It's highly inefficient, and very expensive. Only a small fraction of the available solar energy actually goes into the production of hydrogen. Photocells deteriorate and become even more inefficient, and they also fail regularly. Recently produced, so called "low cost" photo cells have had failure rates as high as 25 percent in the FIRST year. The electrolysis cells require expensive metals such as gold or platinum to reduce their deterioration, and often some sort of chemicals in the water to enhance conductivity. The hydrogen must be compressed for storage and transportation, which also takes even more energy.
Electrical energy delivered to my house already costs about double the price of fuel in my car tank, per BTU. Solar electricity is the highest cost electricity to produce. Add to that the cost of electrolysis and compression, and you have a super dud.