Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

ammoniaenergy.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 133 posts

Re: Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

#21

Post by epistasis »

buckle8017 wrote: post #18
epistasis wrote: post #2

Perfect project for rural Minnesota, that needs the ammonia, but also has a surprising amount of solar colocated with farms. And a fair amount of wind in the southwest. However there are far far larger projects going on over the world. China is building multiple GW of wind and solar to power a massive ammonia/green hydrogen site right now. I frequently hear of sites in Spain in the hundreds of MW range. The US has be…

Fossil fuels remain more cost effective. The US isn't a centrally planned economy (sort of) so the more economical option wins.

For a very very long time, fracking was not economical, and only through massive government investment did it become cost effective.

Same goes for renewables, and electrolyzers. All evidence points to a future with renewable energy costing a small fraction of fossil fuels, and electrolyzers being cheaper than hydrogen from gas. But the future needs to be built. We can either lose out and buy the tech from others, or be leaders and reap the early rewards.

Re: Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

#22

Post by omgwtfbyobbq »

buckle8017 wrote: post #18
epistasis wrote: post #2

Perfect project for rural Minnesota, that needs the ammonia, but also has a surprising amount of solar colocated with farms. And a fair amount of wind in the southwest. However there are far far larger projects going on over the world. China is building multiple GW of wind and solar to power a massive ammonia/green hydrogen site right now. I frequently hear of sites in Spain in the hundreds of MW range. The US has be…

Fossil fuels remain more cost effective. The US isn't a centrally planned economy (sort of) so the more economical option wins.

The US is centrally planned to some degree, just in different ways and by different interests.

I suspect the interests/actions of lobbyists for certain companies/sectors had significant influence on things like taxes, and is a type of central planning.

It's different than most central planned economies because there are two entities operating in parallel (a quasi-private corporate state in addition to the usual government state), but I'd say it's still centralized/planned, even if it's not the state/government doing the planning.

Re: Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

#23

Post by tastyfreeze »

daliusd wrote: post #3

It would be interesting to get details what’s the process behind. Can you reproduce it on personal level?

On a smaller scale plasma electrolytic cells look more economical than Haber-Bosch but are still new tech. I don't remember the company trying to commercialize it but their target is on farm nitrate production.

Re: Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

#24

Post by yegle »

buckle8017 wrote: post #18
epistasis wrote: post #2

Perfect project for rural Minnesota, that needs the ammonia, but also has a surprising amount of solar colocated with farms. And a fair amount of wind in the southwest. However there are far far larger projects going on over the world. China is building multiple GW of wind and solar to power a massive ammonia/green hydrogen site right now. I frequently hear of sites in Spain in the hundreds of MW range. The US has be…

Fossil fuels remain more cost effective. The US isn't a centrally planned economy (sort of) so the more economical option wins.

Mostly because the carbon dioxide emission is not properly reflected in the fossil fuel pricing.

Basically, every single person on earth is subsiding the big oil by bearing the consequence/cost of the higher CO2 concentration.

Re: Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

#25

Post by stymaar »

buckle8017 wrote: post #18
epistasis wrote: post #2

Perfect project for rural Minnesota, that needs the ammonia, but also has a surprising amount of solar colocated with farms. And a fair amount of wind in the southwest. However there are far far larger projects going on over the world. China is building multiple GW of wind and solar to power a massive ammonia/green hydrogen site right now. I frequently hear of sites in Spain in the hundreds of MW range. The US has be…

Fossil fuels remain more cost effective. The US isn't a centrally planned economy (sort of) so the more economical option wins.

Like it or not every, non-failed-state, modern economy is a centrally-planned one. The economy never lives in a vacuum, it's always a product of the institutions that govern them (regulations, subsidies, taxes, etc.) Something is always “the most cost-effective option” because the institutions made it so.

Re: Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

#26

Post by bricss »

yegle wrote: post #24
buckle8017 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fossil fuels remain more cost effective. The US isn't a centrally planned economy (sort of) so the more economical option wins.

Mostly because the carbon dioxide emission is not properly reflected in the fossil fuel pricing. Basically, every single person on earth is subsiding the big oil by bearing the consequence/cost of the higher CO2 concentration.

[dead]

Re: Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

#27

Post by jamal-kumar »

buckle8017 wrote: post #18
epistasis wrote: post #2

Perfect project for rural Minnesota, that needs the ammonia, but also has a surprising amount of solar colocated with farms. And a fair amount of wind in the southwest. However there are far far larger projects going on over the world. China is building multiple GW of wind and solar to power a massive ammonia/green hydrogen site right now. I frequently hear of sites in Spain in the hundreds of MW range. The US has be…

Fossil fuels remain more cost effective. The US isn't a centrally planned economy (sort of) so the more economical option wins.

If you're not accounting for all the wildfire smoke costing billions of dollars maybe your calculations for cost effectiveness have some adjustments to be made

Re: Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

#28

Post by possiblyburrito »

Animats wrote: post #4

There are press releases which link to other press releases. Found the technical paper from 2021.[1] The ammonia plant is built for intermittent operation, so it can shut down or reduce output when there's no wind. No need to store much electrical energy. Storage tanks hold the ammonia. It's a reasonable idea, but is it cost-effective? No numbers are given. Still, fertilizer independence alone is worth something. You…

The catch is that the electrolyzer is most of the capex, so intermittency cuts both ways. Tanks are cheap, which makes flexibility nearly free on the storage side, but every hour the stack sits idle the hydrogen coming out of it gets more expensive. That is why these projects obsess over capacity factor and usually want a mix of wind and solar rather than wind alone. Agreed on wanting numbers, the whole question lives in how many hours per year the stack actually runs.

Re: Producing ammonia and fertiliser using wind power in Morris, Minnesota

#29

Post by allannienhuis »

tastyfreeze wrote: post #23
daliusd wrote: post #3

It would be interesting to get details what’s the process behind. Can you reproduce it on personal level?

On a smaller scale plasma electrolytic cells look more economical than Haber-Bosch but are still new tech. I don't remember the company trying to commercialize it but their target is on farm nitrate production.

you might be thinking of https://www.greenlightning.ag/ - seems really cool tech. combined with variable cheap power source like solar or wind, seems like a good way to give ai bit more control over inputs for farmers.
Post reply on HN