a little E...ALL that H20... plus air = NH3

[WiltonRanch]

Now correct me if I'm wrong. Converting water to its constituents is a rather simple process that is done through electrolysis. Done it in grade 8 chemistry. Separating nitrogen from atmospheric air is done simply by way of a separator. Now it's the mixing of n and h to make nh3 where it gets complex. You need either a lightning bolt or a source of heat and an electric arc to create nh3. The big question is the energy put into process given back when it's used for fuel? Someone enlighten me this topic is very interesting. There was talk about a small scale nh3 plant running on wind and solar power. Something like a million dollar price tag and the ability to produce a substantial amount with renewable power.

[tweety]

You're not completely wrong Wilton, have a look at the Licht process.

[TOM4CWB]

WiltonRanch

I believe if you go to nh3canada.com, and read through the basic systems, they give a good background to where energy is going in the near future.

If we are near a big electrical transmssion line... we can suck off cheap 2-3 cent per KW/H when winds are high and the sun shines... and sell back the electricity during the minus 30 cold calm cloudy winter... at 12 cents per KW/H... clean bio fuel flax straw... etc... can be integrated into the structure... high H fuels to make NH3 and use the moisture from the straw... syngas type process... to also create NH3.

The opportunity for some of us... sitting beside the $15B e-grid... just built here... is astounding... if we use just a little imagination...

[MBgrower]

The simplest process would be to use windpower to create hydrogen gas which can be stored and used to power anything. Downside, need to find a way to stabilize it to make it safer to use. Lots of unused land in canada to locate wind turbines to generate h2. There is no shortage of wind in this country.

[tweety]

Big Lentil, what if there is no diesel?

[Klause]

Exactly. You need electricity to finish the process... which we can gain from wind or solar.

Remember there is no free lunch in physics. Energy must come from somewhere at some point at all times.

[cottonpicken]

Jesus I need to get my brother on here. Basically me but ten times smarter. Masters degree in mechanical engineering. Klause get a hold of me on fb if you get any ideas. He may suprise you but I know what you think of engineers,he is farm smart lol.

[grassfarmer]

Funny how solar power was so horribly inefficient it was a joke in a previous thread now you guys are all over it.

[WiltonRanch]

Tweety I looked up the Licht process and STEP. Completely different than Bosch-Haber and 30% less energy needed. Neat, I have to brush up on my chemistry to understand some of the complex stuff.

[TOM4CWB]

Grassy,

NH3 is much more stable as a fuel than gasoline or diesel fuel. Ethanol and Biodiesel has destabilized our fuels so neither is good for more than 4-6 months. NH3 does not degrade... nor do the vessels get h20 inside and rust. Cold and hot also do not bother nh3... good fuel for battery use... to charge the grid when electrical demand calls on the backup.

LNG can do the same... but is carbon based... so Nh3 with byproduct H production for H fuel cells... would be a very nice fit.

[biglentil]

Just like a driveline on a vehicle there are losses every step of the way. Production of hydrogen through the process of electrolysis is temperature dependant but typical commercial efficiency is in the 60 to 75 percent range. 95 percent of commercial hydrogen is produced from Nat gas because much cheaper. Then take into consideration that that hydrogen is the lightest element on the periodic table. To achieve any type of useful energy densities out of it it must be compressed to 2500 psi. That aint cheap or safe. Now you say oh lets create NH3 to make it cheap and safe. Well that requires another expensive process that far less than perfectly efficient.

From wikipedia on Haber process "This conversion is typically conducted at 15–25 MPa (2,200–3,600 psi) or 150–250 bar and between 400–500 °C (752–932 °F), as the gases are passed over four beds of catalyst, with cooling between each pass so as to maintain a reasonable equilibrium constant. On each pass only about 15% conversion occurs, but any unreacted gases are recycled, and eventually an overall conversion of 97% is achieved.[1]"

Why not skip the expensive processes and just burn the Nat Gas directly or use the electricity directly. Its much more efficient and a whole lot cheaper. They have been saying hydrogen fuel cells are 10 years away for 30 years. The truth is it does not make cents.

[WiltonRanch]

Lentil. The hydrogen fuel cell is expensive as it relies on platinum catalysts to work. Besides imagine a car accident with an h2 fueled vehicle. Or much worse an nh3 powered vehicle. Where most of this stuff makes sense is converting renewable electricity to storable state so it can be produced and stored at low demand and put on the grid at peak demand. I think there are many years and technological breakthroughs needed before any of this will compete with hydrocarbons but never say never. What is interesting is this Licht guy is pulling co2 out of the atmosphere and converting it into carbon nano fibres with all renewable energy which have potential to replace steel in certain applications. Lots of it is largely experimental and how feasible it is to scale up to commercial use is the next question. What I wonder is a lot of these reactive cells seem to require precious and semi precious metals. So do we go from mining oil and gas to mining the metals for energy? Maybe the next big thing is metals like nickle palladium platinum etc.