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

Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 179 posts

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#51

Post by aifooh7Keew6xoo »

Retric wrote: post #44
aifooh7Keew6xoo wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/attempt-to-pass-a-tank... No, they have significant issues on a regular basis still.

Anything dangerous at scale has issues. That doesn’t mean people are unwilling to fill up at a gas station or use other hydrocarbon fuels despite plenty of far worse examples. https://www.npr.org/2021/11/06/1053162519/sierra-leone-oil-t... And plenty of more recent examples: https://www.fox29.com/news/tanker-truck-fire-closes-stretch-... Ammonia is one of the most common chemicals manufactured and transported around…

My primary point here is that if you see an ammonia spill you're going to die whether or not it explodes.

I suppose it's worth noting in your second link, the fatalities were from the kinetics of the impact, which is a hazard that belongs to "things with velocity" rather than "things containing fuels".

We can assume that uncontained fire and explosion are categorical hazards with fuels.

Ammonia has significant risks that few other proposed fuels present and I believe it's worth considering whether this is something we want moving outside of hazmat routes between industrial zones.

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#52

Post by fbdab103 »

lazide wrote: post #28
ilyt wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, petrol or diesel isn't that nice either

Anhydrous ammonia is much worse, creating rolling clouds of ground level deadly gas for long distances. And being very flammable. And explosive. Gas doing 2 of those 3, and diesel only 1.

If it is cheap, that will beat out a lot of other concerns. Not sufficient for consumer use, but power plants are already hazardous places that can engineer significant safety controls.

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#53

Post by sfink »

justinclift wrote: post #45
PumpkinSpice wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's realistic as a fuel for cars, but "worldwide transportation" means more than that. I suspect they're talking about container ships, tankers, and such. Ammonia is easier to liquify than hydrogen, and is in many respects easier to handle. However, it's definitely not something you want to have a spill of at a gas station or in your garage, and for that reason, it probably won't have "consumer" uses.…

Hmmm, "gas station filled with petrol that explodes" vs "gas station filled with hydrogen that explodes". Being near either one as it explodes would be bad, but I wonder which one looks more impressive movie-effects-wise? :)

In my limited understanding, neither one really explodes. The petrol one would look like a huge impressive fireball that launches a big black mushroom cloud and then just burns like crazy. The hydrogen one, if the hydrogen is fairly pure, would be like a big faint blue wispy fireball, not all that impressive.

If there were an oxidizer in the mix somehow, it would be rather more explosive.

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#54

Post by colechristensen »

aaron695 wrote: post #24
londons_explore wrote: post #2

Big if true... This could enable fertilizer production with no CO2 emissions. The numbers in the paper suggest that it might prove cheaper than natural gas based production which is common today. Fertilizer production is 2.1% of all CO2 emissions right now.

> Big if true... Could you explain exactly why you would say this? Working past their fake news headlines like 100%. Hydrogen is almost 100% and that's not big if true. We are decades away for renewable electricity only for our electric needs. Then you have oil and many other things electric can replace which are worse than gas. What about this is big? In a dream world of unlimited electricity everything is easy, lik…

California produces about half of its electricity from renewables, mostly solar.

We’re decades away from 100%, but how long away are we nationally from 50%, 65%, 90%, 99%?

As solar production ramps up to higher percentages there is going to be more and more peak power in excess of demand. Industrial scale electrochemistry is going to be one of the alternatives to batteries that’s going to be developed.

Already nitrogen fixation requires a huge amount of energy, this process at scale could very well require less energy than the modern haber process.

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#55

Post by justinclift »

sfink wrote: post #53
justinclift wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm, "gas station filled with petrol that explodes" vs "gas station filled with hydrogen that explodes". Being near either one as it explodes would be bad, but I wonder which one looks more impressive movie-effects-wise? :)

In my limited understanding, neither one really explodes. The petrol one would look like a huge impressive fireball that launches a big black mushroom cloud and then just burns like crazy. The hydrogen one, if the hydrogen is fairly pure, would be like a big faint blue wispy fireball, not all that impressive. If there were an oxidizer in the mix somehow, it would be rather more explosive.

Cool, thanks. :)

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#56

Post by colechristensen »

justinclift wrote: post #45
PumpkinSpice wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's realistic as a fuel for cars, but "worldwide transportation" means more than that. I suspect they're talking about container ships, tankers, and such. Ammonia is easier to liquify than hydrogen, and is in many respects easier to handle. However, it's definitely not something you want to have a spill of at a gas station or in your garage, and for that reason, it probably won't have "consumer" uses.…

Hmmm, "gas station filled with petrol that explodes" vs "gas station filled with hydrogen that explodes". Being near either one as it explodes would be bad, but I wonder which one looks more impressive movie-effects-wise? :)

Hydrogen is way worse than gasoline or any hydrocarbon. It has to be stored at very high pressures and there’s no practical situation in which it doesn’t explode.

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#57

Post by aaronbrethorst »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #46
PumpkinSpice wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's realistic as a fuel for cars, but "worldwide transportation" means more than that. I suspect they're talking about container ships, tankers, and such. Ammonia is easier to liquify than hydrogen, and is in many respects easier to handle. However, it's definitely not something you want to have a spill of at a gas station or in your garage, and for that reason, it probably won't have "consumer" uses.…

Toyota have produced a prototype ammonia engine they claim is the end of the EV market.

Neat. I look forward to them rolling out a production model in 2043.

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#58

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

lazide wrote: post #28
ilyt wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, petrol or diesel isn't that nice either

Anhydrous ammonia is much worse, creating rolling clouds of ground level deadly gas for long distances. And being very flammable. And explosive. Gas doing 2 of those 3, and diesel only 1.

Diesel is none of those things.

I have extinguished a fire with diesel.

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#59

Post by colechristensen »

londons_explore wrote: post #2

Big if true... This could enable fertilizer production with no CO2 emissions. The numbers in the paper suggest that it might prove cheaper than natural gas based production which is common today. Fertilizer production is 2.1% of all CO2 emissions right now.

CO2 production with current processes isn’t necessary. They could use renewable electricity to hydrolyze water and power the plant, it’s just cheaper to use the grid and methane as a source of hydrogen.

Switching to carbon free ammonia would be no great task, just a price hike and some minor retrofitting.

Re: Nitrogen electroreduction with almost 100% current-to-ammonia efficiency (2022)

#60

Post by im3w1l »

lazide wrote: post #28
ilyt wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, petrol or diesel isn't that nice either

Anhydrous ammonia is much worse, creating rolling clouds of ground level deadly gas for long distances. And being very flammable. And explosive. Gas doing 2 of those 3, and diesel only 1.

Could we use this process as a building block in the synthesis of some "nicer" fuel? What can ammonia be semi-efficiently converted to?

Edit: Maybe methanol?

Post reply on HN