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

61–70 of 133 posts

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

#61

Post by strictnein »

avadodin wrote: post #54
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…

I don't support fossil fuels but wind works a small fraction of the time, it is awful to wildlife and it is an eyesore. Instead of wasting the already wasteful energy by making fertilizer out of air, these farms could likely much more efficiently re–capture runoff from their waterways that is now being dumped into the sea harming humans and wildlife alike.

The runoff from farms in rural Minnesota is being dumped into the sea? There's almost no place farther from the sea in North America than upper midwest rural farms.

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

#62

Post by epistasis »

avadodin wrote: post #54
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…

I don't support fossil fuels but wind works a small fraction of the time, it is awful to wildlife and it is an eyesore. Instead of wasting the already wasteful energy by making fertilizer out of air, these farms could likely much more efficiently re–capture runoff from their waterways that is now being dumped into the sea harming humans and wildlife alike.

Calling wind power "wasteful" is just silly. We need to be a bit more hard nosed when it comes to energy policy. Not only does wind save tons of money, t is hyper efficient, and anti-correlates with solar in most geographies. Meaning a small amount of cheap battery storage mixed with wind plus solar delivers extremely cheap, reliable energy, with amazing dispatch characteristics.

People get all emotional about views, but most people find it beautiful and a few people's visual aesthetics should not override one of the pillars of the future economy.

Additionally, the fix for runoff from farms into the gulf is mere regulation and fining, but that's not going to stop the need for ammonia! Plus, try to regulate these farmers, they are largely parasites in the country through the farm bill yet still remain one of the most potent political factions in the country.

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

#63

Post by firsthummus »

otterley wrote: post #49
hunterpayne wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are confusing capacity costs (capital outlay) with utilization costs (what you actually pay per watt). Its true that renewables have a very low cap cost. They are also several times the utilization cost. That's why electricity in CA is 2-3x what it was just 10 years ago. And energy prices are basically the same as 10 years ago. PS LCOE is a BS stat used to confuse those that don't understand energy markets, not a…

> They are also several times the utilization cost Prove it. > electricity in CA is 2-3x what it was just 10 years ago. That has nothing to do with the cost of generation. The reason costs have gone up are 1/wildfire mitigation and liability, 2/replacement of aging grid infrastructure (plus a geographically diverse state - replacing infrastructure in mountains is costly), 3/rising demand and new fixed infrastructure…

LCOE is helpful but only holds up to a certain point. Latest Lazard report has levelized cost of firming included as well. Dispatchability of power is an important part of the picture missed by LCOE for weather-dependent generation. Once grids are meaningfully composed of solar/wind, the cost of firming is significant and mostly comes from gas peaker plants these days.

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

#64

Post by defrost »

c1ccccc1 wrote: post #59
defrost wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's providing an alternative to middle east sourced fertiliser from plants that can no longer ship or, in some cases, can no longer operate due to war damage. US states aren't the only places on the globe building out renewable powered green hydrogen, methanol, ammonia, etc.

I mean, I guess the answer there would be to build the usual kind of Haber-Brosch process plants that run continuously, and feed them with hydrogen derived from natural gas. But just build them in the US.

> But just build them in the US.

Sorry, that's not going to work out for myself, the 8.5+ million hectares of grain growing about my location, nor for the billion+ tonne per annum of mineral resource shifted in my state.

We're interested in producing fertilisers and fuel from non fossil sources.

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

#65

Post by epistasis »

strictnein wrote: post #61
avadodin wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't support fossil fuels but wind works a small fraction of the time, it is awful to wildlife and it is an eyesore. Instead of wasting the already wasteful energy by making fertilizer out of air, these farms could likely much more efficiently re–capture runoff from their waterways that is now being dumped into the sea harming humans and wildlife alike.

The runoff from farms in rural Minnesota is being dumped into the sea? There's almost no place farther from the sea in North America than upper midwest rural farms.

It causes massive algeal growths in the Gulf of Mexico. This sucks massive amounts of oxygen out of the water leading to so-called "dead zones".

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

#66

Post by BigTTYGothGF »

avadodin wrote: post #54
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…

I don't support fossil fuels but wind works a small fraction of the time, it is awful to wildlife and it is an eyesore. Instead of wasting the already wasteful energy by making fertilizer out of air, these farms could likely much more efficiently re–capture runoff from their waterways that is now being dumped into the sea harming humans and wildlife alike.

> awful to wildlife

I think this has been greatly exaggerated, but even if the claims are true it's as nothing compared to fossil fuel.

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

#67

Post by westurner »

hunterpayne wrote: post #53
zahlman wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is better than getting fertiliser from fossil fuels, but it is still not great. Please explain how there is anything even remotely bad about it.

Its horrendously inefficient...and inefficiency is usually bad for the environment. For example, the solar PV when sited in Minnesota is so inefficient just making the electricity from natural gas would produce less CO2 per watt. So there is that, and that's before you look at if all the equipment you use to build the plant was better used elsewhere. And then you could put the solar PV somewhere where it would actual…

("Reducing methane is the fastest strategy available to reduce warming" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32608160#32612544 )

"Copper nanoclusters: Selective CO2 to methane conversion beyond 1 A/cm²" (2024) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092633732... ... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40899914

From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48953769 :

> [1] "Production of hydrogen and carbon nanotubes from methane using a multi-pass floating catalyst chemical vapour deposition reactor with process gas recycling" (2025) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-025-01925-3

>> A renewable feedstock process that yields Hydrogen and O-CNT would be yielding teal hydrogen.

What should or could be made out of natural gas (instead of just carbon black)?

Hydrogen, Helium, Oxidized Carbon Nanotubes, Graphene, Carbon Nanospheres. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48949089

Graphene and various other CO2-derived carbon products can be added to construction blocks.

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

#68

Post by lebuffon »

defrost wrote: post #52
hunterpayne wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Solar surpassed fossil fuels in efficiency ages ago" You are going to have to explain this. Because there is no measurement of efficiency in which solar PV in Minnesota in efficient in any way. To produce a watt of electricity using natural gas actually produces less CO2 than a watt from solar that far north. So it isn't even more environmentally friendly. And its far more expensive. It uses far more energy. So I ha…

> to produce a watt of electricity using natural gas actually produces less CO2 than a watt from solar that far north. For the next watt, you need more natural gas which co-releases more CO2 .. or you can just use the same solar panel again - with its fixed up front CO2 cost already "paid for" Over 25 or 30 years a panel keeps producing w/out additional CO2 release, during that same period natural gas extraction and…

And when we begin coupling solar to cheap sodium ion battery banks it gets very interesting. Sodium ion will even be compatible with a Minnesota winter!

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

#69

Post by zanecodes »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #50
zanecodes wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fossil fuel being heavily subsidised kind of undermines both of your points.

Heavily directly subsidized and then additionally "subsidized" through massive military expenditures as well.

Not to mention indirectly subsidised by ignoring the externalities imposed on the health of ourselves and our environment.

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

#70

Post by anyonecancode »

strictnein wrote: post #61
avadodin wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't support fossil fuels but wind works a small fraction of the time, it is awful to wildlife and it is an eyesore. Instead of wasting the already wasteful energy by making fertilizer out of air, these farms could likely much more efficiently re–capture runoff from their waterways that is now being dumped into the sea harming humans and wildlife alike.

The runoff from farms in rural Minnesota is being dumped into the sea? There's almost no place farther from the sea in North America than upper midwest rural farms.

It runs into the Mississippi river, which runs into the sea.
Post reply on HN