By the way, the reason Gallium is an impurity in Aluminum oxides is that Aluminum and Gallium are chemically similar [both contiguous elements in the the Earth Metal (s2p1) series, Al is 1s2 2s2p6 3s2p1 and Gallium is 1s2 2s2p6 3s2p6 4s2d10p1]. Bush is a symptom, not the disease.
And better batteries are the ongoing holy grail for EV's.
Now, using hydrogen as a benchmark is, of course, making it sound much better than it may be, since as a battery, hydrogen sucks really bad. Being much better than hydrogen is something we have already accomplished, so the question becomes compared to other batteries, how effective is this.
It would seem that what it really has going for it is stability ... one presumes that it is not going to discharge on its own even if not tapped for hydrogen for weeks at a time. So I would think that the most likely use for this is for the back up power supply component in PHEV's, which is presently provided by gasoline/diesel. Utsukushikereba sore de ii
The only advantage of this over pure hydrogen is that storing Aluminum and Gallium in a "just add water!" hydrogen fuel cell is easier than handling pure hydrogen. But the result of this is to produce Aluminum oxide from recycled aluminum, so the spent fuel cells would have to be recycled into Aluminum-production again. Also, I am not convinced the Gallium will catalyse as oppose to being consumed and ending up as impurities in the Aluminum Oxide.
This scheme will result in making Aluminum, Gallium and electric power more expensive, and no reuse of existing liquid fuel infrastructure. Bush is a symptom, not the disease.
And carbon powder can be created from biomass through direct charcoal conversion, giving very good transportability and stability.
But altogether I'd rather bike to the closest electric train and let the train operator worry about dragging the motors and brakes and all of that around. That way I don't have to park anything in front of the house. Utsukushikereba sore de ii
