It appears to be good science, but lousy engineering. To be fair to the original, the whole 'this research will save the planet shtick' is pretty much boilerpla

It appears to be good science, but lousy engineering. To be fair to the original, the whole 'this research will save the planet shtick' is pretty much boilerplate for any paper[0]. Photocatalytic H2 production will never be practical vs even boring old solar->electricity->Water-splitting. Literal acres of catalyst and transparent plumbing are not cheap or maintenance free, never mind that a hydrogen 'farm' producing mixed hydrogen and oxygen will make the Hindenburg look like a tea candle in comparison. re the conditions: the energy cutoff appears to be at around 370nm, so it essentially operates under UV light only, at atmospheric to a few bar pressure and close enough to room temperature. [0]e.g. Every nanotechnology paper is going to claim to all but revolutionize one or more of: drug delivery, cancer treatment, materials science, or my favorite, lithium batteries. Nine times out of ten though they are just taking <insert metal> and making <insert shape>: something which is useful to know how to do, but not typically revolutionary.