There is not that much waste ammonia around, and making it form natural gas to make hydrogen would by silly compared to just directly converting natural gas to hydrogen.

I -

completely agree. This is yet another solution in search of a problem. Ammonia is a (toxic) energy carrier in this context, not a primary energy source. In other words, you still have to make the stuff.

GET YOUR URGENT LOAN AT ALOWER RATE OF 3% AND PAY OFF YOUR BILL.

Get your urgent loan now at alower rate of 3% and pay off your bill.

GET YOUR URGENT LOAN ONLINE NOW AT ALOWER RATE OF 3% AND PAY OFF YOUR BILL.CONTACT THE MAIL VIA:liussifanocharles@yahoo.com

It appears that this process can produce hydrogen from very dilute solutions. Ammonia in a city waster treatment plant might be a good source however fertilizer is not a waste.

Someone check the temperature of hell; I agree with Kit P.

The production of hydrogen from ammonia is interesting, but it begs the question:  why?  Excess ammonia may be more efficiently converted to e.g. ammonium carbonate (Eprida) for fertilizer than for fuel.  The prospects for this reaction appear to be limited to ammonia supplies which are too far from agricultural users and sufficiently concentrated to be recoverable to hydrogen at reasonable cost; otherwise, nitrosifying bacteria (feeding nitrifying bacteria) would be the preferred disposal option.

It seems that the intention here is to use ammonia as a H2 transport medium, since it can easily be liquefied at room temp at only 8 atmosphere (~129 psi), at a volumetric energy density 1.5x that of LH2, or 1/2 the volumetric density of gasoline. Since future H2-car can manage at least 50 mpg or more, then it will need but a thin-wall and light-weight ammonia tank having only the same size as that of the gasoline tank of a 25-mpg car of today.

Since ammonia (NH3) can be easily produced from H2 and N2 via the Haber process, then H2 produced from gasification of coal, biomass, etc. can be immediately combined with exhaust gas from a powerplant which is O2-depleted but full of N2 to produce NH3. With CO2 sequestration and NOx and SOx removal, then the exhaust gas has nothing left but N2, ready to be combined with the H2. So, renewable future energy plan can use waste biomass for power plants combustion, and use the heat of the combustion with renewable electricity from wind or solar to produce H2 via high-temp water electrolysis, while sequester the CO2 for methane production via H2 + CO2 by means of Sabatier process, for home methane use, while saving the N2 from exhaust gas for NH3 production for transportation fuel.
The NH3 will then be flowed via pipelines, or transported via tankers to a gas station. The kicker here is having sufficient NH3 electrolytic capacity on board a car in order to produce enough H2 for peak transient demand. A H2-HEV with a large enough battery pack will remedy this problem.

This will move us one step further into the Hydrogen Economy. The advantage of NH3 over H2 or CH4 in transportation is the use of light-weight and low-pressure storage tank and high volumetric density.

Roger -

are you seriously suggesting driving around with a tank full of ammonia? Gasoline and diesel aren't healthy either, but they are nowhere near as volatile as ammonia. How are you going to fill up without retching?

Besides, Haber-Bosch is anything but fuel-efficient. Containing hydrogen in a liquid is a good idea, but the carrier should be carbon, not nitrogen.

Retching? hell: ammonia is toxic. Joe and Jane Sixpack will kill themselves in great numbers if they have to handle ammonia. This work will not produce ammonia for retail energy storage and transport.

Producing H2 for retail use might be a reasonable goal, but not if the ultimate source of the ammonia is a fossil fuel. CO2 capture and sequestration on the scale required to mitigate anthropogenic global warming is impossible (approximately one thousand cubic miles of CO2 at STP annually), and so all fossil fuels will be made illegal in the not distant future.

Ammonia could be stored in a special safety tank, not unlike the sponge-filled bladder tanks that race drivers use, called (unfortunately) "fuel cells". Dividing the tank up into several sub-tanks could further reduce the likely rapid-escape volume. The tank would be outside the vehicle's cabin. Any crash would be outdoors, surely, and the vapors are lighter than air. Farmers handle this stuff all the time. You are allowed to carry up to 13 cubic meters in the US without a safety license. It could be made safer by diluting with water, or maybe combining with other chemicals or making a gel (think ammonia Sterno) to slow down evaporation. I think I'd rather be carrying this than a high-pressure hydrogen tank, or even gasoline.

A possible application might be to store solar or wind energy in a large-scale ammonia tank farm, for fuel for vehicles. Thus avoiding intermittency of supply as an issue. Might make sense for large-scale vehicles (ships, trains, tractors etc.) if they can find an efficient way to synthesize the ammonia. This is really a variant of the hydrogen economy, which assumes that the search for great hydrogen adsorbents doesn't pan out.

Something to consider, but PHEVs have to come first.

How much ammonia will be smelled will depend on how well engineered the fueling system will be and on the manufacturing tolerance. No ammonia needs be leaked into the air during fueling process. Thank God that ammonia has a very strong odor, hence its safety. H2 is more dangerous due to its higher flammability and lack of odor, not that this danger cannot be engineered away, but perhaps at higher cost, due to the much higher pressures involved in H2 containment system, and the leakiness of H2 thru certain materials.

The Haber-Bosch process requires a lot of energy (1% of total energy consumption) due to the need to produce H2 from methane, and the need to compress the H2 and N2 to 200 atm at 450 degrees C. Once H2 is already produced, then the energy requirement will be drastically reduced, especially if the heat used in the process is recycled continously and not wasted. The energy used in compressing the H2 and N2 appears to have been lost once NH3 is produced, since NH3 liquified at much lower pressure, BUT, this pressure is recoverable once NH3 is broken back down into H2 and N2, if the electrolytic apparatus is set up to recover this pressure.

More important questions are, will NH3 production cost more energy and money than F-T synthesis of HC? NH3 production uses very cheap catalyst, Iron Oxide, unlike more costly catalysts used in F-T synthesis. And how clean and how efficient can HC combustion be compared to H2 combustion or hybrid FCV? FCV will be essentially pollution-free.

I have several commments:
1) Utilizing free ammonia from waste water is an excellent idea. Talini et al. has proven that 98% of ammonia in human urine can be captured through a stripping process. Nearly 2 g/L of ammonia was found in stored urine. In addition, urea which is prevalent in urine can be easily hydrolized to ammonia. No Haber Bosch process required.

2) Nearly 3,000+ miles of NH3 distribution pipeline exists in the US. The DOE's Assessment of Ammonia as an On-board Storage system for H2 found that NH3 was the best candidate due to it's 17 wt% of H2.

3) There is the potential to produce a net energy of 31.45 W-h per gram of H2. Can any of you think of another process that allows that at ambient temperature and pressure? I think not!

4) Having a net energy suggests that an automobile featuring on-board hydrogen production through in situ ammonia electrolysis can be self-sustaining until ammonia is depleted. Sounds out-of-this-world huh?

5) When comparing NH3 to Gas: NH3 is less flamable and leaks are easily detected. It is no more dangerous than petro.

In conclusion, ammonia is a hydrogen-dense non-carbon containing liquid that can easily be stored at STP. Besides the "scare" to change, what is the disadvantages of using ammonia? Using ammonia to produce fertilizer to produce corn to grow corn to produce ethanol is extremely innefficient!!! Why not use ammonia directly? Plus - ethanol burns dirtier than gas!!!!!!!!

Thanks, Bryan, for offering further insights into this fascinating subject. The Hydrogen economy may come sooner than expected!

so where are the blogers comments on the arsc whole house fuel cell units their installing. come on guys lets hear your real comments thanks.

lets hear your comments guy of the future survival of ARSC and there future stock prospect.