DOE launches its first Li-ion battery recycling R&D center: ReCell; driving toward closed-loop recycling
ITA: Tin in Li-ion batteries could represent significant new use

Yara and ENGIE to test green hydrogen technology in fertilizer production

Yara, the world’s leading fertilizer company, and ENGIE have joined forces to test green hydrogen technology in fertilizer production.

Yara is working towards making carbon-free fertilizer, and clean hydrogen is the major enabler for making CO2-free green ammonia, which is the key ingredient for “green” fertilizer.

On 5 February, Yara and ENGIE agreed to carry out a feasibility study, the goal of which is to design a green hydrogen plant integrated with Yara’s existing ammonia plant in Pilbara, Western Australia.

The goal of the feasibility study is to convert the Pilbara ammonia plant from one that relies completely on natural gas for its hydrogen to one where a significant share of its hydrogen comes from renewable power. Reaching the goal will significantly reduce the plant’s CO2 emissions.

Comments

Engineer-Poet

What's to test?  You feed hydrogen and nitrogen into a Haber-process reactor and ammonia comes out.  The reactor doesn't care what the hydrogen comes from.

The news release doesn't say what "significantly" means.  A handful of percent would be enough for them to announce "success" and then discontinue any further efforts unless the government pays them to.  They're probably only doing this because government is paying for it.

HarveyD

Yes, it is obvious and normal that governments are often called to finance the introduction of most new technologies required to reduce misery, pollution and GHGs.

However, governments (only) have the legal authority to tax and/or charge fees for pollution from ICEVs, CPPs, NGPPs, HVACs, cement factories, tires, brakes, farming and other sources and use the revenues to support non-polluting technologies, infrastructures, education, medical, border protection, defence, law and order services etc.

Without effective governance we would quickly fall into polluted anarchy and misery.

Engineer-Poet

WTF do your politics have to do with wasteful spending on uneconomic "green" demos, AlzHarvey?

HarveyD

Well managed governments is essential and normally lead to vigorous sustained economy without poisoning the environment and living creatures.

A lasting balance is required between the rights of industries, the economy and the essential needs (including good health) of the users of the products and services produced, the environment and other living creatures.

If that principle is not followed for extended periods, the ground is set for a major downfall and/or the end of an era. It happened many times in many places in the last 10,000 years and will happen again, if growing inequalities and environmental protection are not properly addressed.

Engineer-Poet

And that has exactly what to do with paying way above market rates so Loblaw can add to their bottom line by installing PV panels, and soaking the consumer to pay for it all?  Enriching a major corporation at the expense of families is INCREASING inequalities, you buffoon.

The money would have been better spent buying Gentilly 2 and recommissioning it to sell power southward.

HarveyD

The great SAEP cannot stop calling people names. He may not be smart enough to realize that he will not earn respect that way.

Gentilly 2 what closed because it was not required and because H-Q has a huge surplus of clean Hydro-Wind energy for the next 15 years or so. It should have never been built in the first place. Selling power southward @ 4 cents/kWh is possible with lower cost Hydro plants but not profitable with NPPs nor with current wind turbines.
Much larger future wind turbines installed in the right places and coupled with Hydro's large reservoirs could make exports profitable.

Apple selling $147 phones for over $1000 would be a better example. UNER and Amazon taking a 20% cut on products and services without touching or seeing them is another examples.

Engineer-Poet
The great SAEP cannot stop calling people names.
Praising corporate welfare while painting it as a remedy for "inequality" deserves much stronger condemnation than "buffoon".  Maybe you are so obtuse that you cannot see the glaring contradiction, but I'm hoping other readers are brighter than you are... or less corrupt.
Gentilly 2 what [sic] closed because it was not required
Except HQ was unable to run its southbound transmission line at full capacity a while back because it needed every watt of hydro for its in-province customers.  Gentilly 2 would have been mighty handy that day, not to mention profitable.
H-Q has a huge surplus of clean Hydro-Wind energy for the next 15 years or so.
HQ is planning to sell even more power to New England, and Gentilly 2's 675 MW of always-on capacity would be just the thing to keep the juice (and money) flowing.  Oh, you could have maintenance outages during the spring melt when heating demands are light and the hydro turbines have to run at capacity to keep the water from overtopping the dams, but everyone's in a pretty relaxed situation at that time of year so it's hardly critical.  During cold snaps and heat waves, not so much.
HarveyD

Once again, super SAEP got it all wrong.

After 75 years, Quebec-Hydro, a fully nationalized cooperation, is supplying clean low cost electricity (Hydro-Wind) for almost 10 million people at the lowest rate in Canada and USA. Sales in 2018 were for 209 TWh for close to $14B. Profit was at $3.2B and Dividends paid to Quebec Government were $2.4B. Sales taxes paid to Provincial and Federal Governments were close $2B. Some 36TWh of very low cost (4 cents/kWh) were sold to neighboring New England States.

Comparative rates for electricity in 2018: Quebec/Montreal=100, Vancouver = 160, Toronto = 186, New York = 427, Boston = 442 etc.

Relative increase in QH electricity price during the last 20 years = 21%, Cost of living = 40%, Gasoline/heating oil = 123% etc

Please note that private industry producing and distributing electricity in Canada and USA routinely overcharge their customers for (often highly) polluted e-energy and pay very little or no dividends to States-Provincial-Federal Governments. They are in fact perfect examples of what not to do, and certainly not examples to follow.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)