Let's see if I can put this in a way that you can understand. Let us consider a simpler reaction. Pure carbon contains a certain amount of energy that can be released by burning it. You have a lump of coal, which you set on fire. Each carbon atom combines with two oxygen atoms, producing carbon dioxide. This reaction releases energy in the form of heat. To separate the carbon from the oxygen, you have to put energy into that reaction. It takes the same amount of energy to separate that one atom of carbon from the two atoms of oxygen, that was given off when they were combined in the first place. There is no free lunch, here. There is no way to separate that carbon atom from the two oxygen atoms, that doesn't need as much energy to accomplish, as what was given off when that carbon and oxygen combined. If everything was 100% efficient (which nothing ever is) then you could separate carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen by putting in the same amount of energy that you can then get by burning that carbon, combining it with oxygen. But some energy is always lost at each end of the reaction, so in reality, you need to put in more energy. You, of course, are positing a more complex reaction, involving more complex chemicals, but the principle is the same. You cannot produce higher-energy chemicals from lower-energy chemicals, without putting in enough energy to make up the difference.