Ammonia—a renewable fuel made from sun, air, and water—could power the globe without carbon

. 52 Videos
95% 39,852 852

About :

With copious solar and wind power, Australia aims to displace Haber-Bosch, a dirty, 100-year-old recipe for making ammonia

Read more - https://scim.ag/2KQRHH6



Chris Burns

supervising producer
Sarah Crespi

Chris Burns
Sarah Crespi
Catherine Matacic
Robert F. Service

story by
Robert F. Service

fuel cell photo
Steven Mortion
Fellow of the Royal Photographic Society

fuel cell illustration
Val Altounian

stock footage

stock graphics

Chris Burns

xxxlive movies

mods de vegetta777 4 temporada

formatar celular multilaser ms5

o sa mire 82

minecraft dinosaurs ep 100

formatar tablet lenoxx tb 52

devatha shobhan babu


popularmmos tropical vacation 5

formatar samsung galaxy ace duos

Tags :

Science Magazine ammonia hydrogen nitrogen cleaner fertilizer electrolyzer global warming CO2 emissions CO2 emissions green energy solar wind windmill solar panel solar array windmills ship store plant ammonia plant green energy renewable energy

Google AdSense
728 x 90

Similar Videos:


    Popular Comments:

Derek Borkent . 2020-02-19
Just how insane are these Co2 climate freaks? Burning ammonia gives you nitrogen oxide, toxic to just about everything. And THAT to do away with co2, an eco friendly essential gas? They call me a climate denier? Better than those f*cking climate fanatics desperate to destroy my and my fellow deniers' f*cking earth. Stop f*cking Breathing, and do us deniers and the planet a big favour.
121 2 . Reply
Brett Moore . 2020-02-16
Water can hold more hydrogen than nitrogen
121 2 . Reply
P. Denner . 2020-01-26
Page 48 f. of this study gives a forecast on the potential costs for producing green ammonia. At present it's not economically viable. If you burn it, you get ~6 kWh/kg. That's more than 10 ct/kWh.
121 2 . Reply
Charles Ashurst . 2019-12-14
amonia = liquid hydrogen in a molecular container of nitrogen. Nifty.
121 2 . Reply
Charles Ashurst . 2019-12-14
This could be plausible or it could be snake oil. It deserves study.
121 2 . Reply
seaplaneguy . 2019-10-23
My new engine can allow NH3 100% to be burned at high RPM. Make fuel at home from solar thermal to engine that turns generator which in turns makes NH3 with NH3 fuel maker. Store in propane tank at 1/2500th the cost of Li-ion. One year of fuel possible... Run car, truck, airplane... New engine is key. On twttter...
121 2 . Reply
0 polution - Unlimited Energy Projects . 2019-10-14
The most useless video...lots of researchers not doing anything to be finished completely.
But really, this is the only one video made without knowledge by someone who thinks he knows.
Very crappy video. Talking rubish about ammonia. This is a killer....can evaporate in the air and kill millions of people by accident.
Think before you talk rubish.
Think about the cost of these plans...to make it safety. Think....brainless man.
121 2 . Reply
Paul Lammers . 2019-08-14
Ammonia: NH3

Ammonium: NH4+

As you can see, the interesting bit is the ion, the one with the + charge. It has an extra H, but it lacks the electron to maintain it. Usually, it finds a negative chloride ion to compensate, together they form the wonderful ammoniumchloride that Dutch people know as Salmiak.

Concern about how toxic this stuff would be are real as for any chemical process involving large energy transfer needed to propel a car. But let's also observe that Dutch people eat massive amounts of this Ammonium-Chloride for fun. If they invent an engine that benefits from these reactions, perhaps they should call it a dropmotor or a salmiak engine.
121 2 . Reply
ryan B . 2019-07-04
yea right. really, I heard if you burn HH gas in atmosphere, it generates ammonia.
121 2 . Reply
August Landmesser . 2019-04-01
Liquid ammonia, more dangerous to manipulate and more toxic - than gasoline?
Hold my beer...
121 2 . Reply
Κώστας Χρυσικόπουλος . 2019-03-27
What does this has to do with green enery? And why just store hydrogen which is also easy to transport and burn directly into an engine?
121 2 . Reply
john doe . 2018-12-29
this is a terrible idea
121 2 . Reply
Random dude . 2018-12-08
The process involves extracting hydrogen, WHY JUST NOT USE IT AS FUEL? I'm pretty sure it's even more effective.
121 2 . Reply
Elena Haskins . 2018-11-25
Many interesting comments. Thank you.
121 2 . Reply
aud_io . 2018-11-21
A lot of people don't seem to understand why this would be useful. Plain hydrogen has horrible energy density and the pressure you have to store it under to make it even reasonable to use as fuel is dangerous, and as people have pointed out, it leaks out of any container you try to store it in. Current batteries are pretty shitty for storing and transporting energy, they are expensive, and they only last a few years before they have to be replaced. One reasonable criticism people are bringing up is the toxicity of ammonia, which I agree is a huge problem, but batteries also contain toxic material so both forms of energy storage are flawed in this way. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of issues with using ammonia as fuel, but all of the people saying to "just use hydrogen" or "just charge a battery" don't seem to see the major flaws with both of these. Also an alarming number of people are also saying this is stupid because it requires energy to make the ammonia... Duh, that's why it's called "energy storage". You use extra solar power to make fuel and store energy for when the sun isn't shining, and to power cars without requiring a long recharge time and a battery replacement every 5-7 years.
121 2 . Reply
Mugi Raharjo . 2018-11-18
compare with another option ?
121 2 . Reply
Вадим Туров . 2018-11-08
But it's flamable and poisonous...
121 2 . Reply
gogogeedus . 2018-11-02
The efficiency of Hydrogen maybe lower than battery technology but the advantages is you don't need to disturb the planet by gathering different chemicals, no mining required, the only issue that needs to be sorted is storage, it will require a lot of investment but once the infrastructure is in place its there to stay as in existing infrastructure which could possible be utilized, I think at the moment work is being carried out on converting hydrogen to hydro carbons by combining hydrogen and carbon from the environment to create clean and efficient hydrocarbons with low carbon emissions for IC engines. ideal for an alternative for people that like IC engines and don't want to change to anything that doesn't make a lot of noise. I see a lot of negative comments about ammonia gas as a fuel, I think these technologies need to be tried in a control environment and then compared
then decisions can be made in regard to its safety, we should not jump to conclusions and create hysteria based on poorly advised information. a lot of cronies out there are against change because it may interfere with their sense of security but sometime we can be living with a completely false sense of security. change is inevitable, with every second that goes by things change, evolution is taking place, technology is no different.
121 2 . Reply
Jean-Pierre De Vent . 2018-09-29
If you burn it under ideal conditions, you get only nitrogen and water and no formed nitrogen oxides but I fear for the word"ideal". I wonder about the exhaust of those Belgian buses that ran on ammonia in 1943 because of diesel shortages.
121 2 . Reply
Mahdi Malmali . 2018-09-09
I am not sure why people are over-reacting to ammonia. It is time to educate people about "facts". Ammonia was a nightmare for farmers in 1950s or 1960s. How do you face ethanol and methanol in your everyday life, without even noticing them? How do you drive a car with 18 gallons of highly flammable/toxic gasoline @ 70 MPH? How do you let your teenage girl buy Acetone to remove the nail polish? These are all double-standards. Something that makes ammonia unique is the possibility of creating ammonia in small scale? If the producing unit goes wrong, then the worst would be to evacuate the house or surrounding (withing 10 meters).
121 2 . Reply
Jarid Gaming . 2018-09-07
So it doesnt do shit bc you cant use the Ammonia as Fuel.
121 2 . Reply
LagiNaLangAko23 . 2018-09-04
As someone from a country highly reliant on oil and seasonal rains for electricity, I'd welcome any method to store energy for our hot summers. Like, maybe ramp up production of these when we have abundant water.
121 2 . Reply
V12 POWER . 2018-08-13
121 2 . Reply
samdee sam . 2018-08-13
Hai ammonia
121 2 . Reply
Garden For Nutrition . 2018-08-12
Ammonia already has an infrastructure in agricultural areas. And in those areas they are used to handling it. It could be a useful alternative in those areas.
121 2 . Reply
FreeStyle . 2018-07-30
Why don't just use hydrogen?
121 2 . Reply
DTXGaming . 2018-07-30
Make ammonia. Only we don't really know how to extract energy out of it once we have it (please don't ask a terrorist). Well that makes petfect sense. And let's ignore hidrogen and oxigen that are produced in the first step.
121 2 . Reply
jorge pearl . 2018-07-27
one of the most efficient fuel cells are hydrogen-oxygen, (the highest possible energy storage) unlike batteries only hydrogen must be carried, oxygen is everywhere (same as hydrocarbon fuels), the problem is the extreme pressure needed, maybe a ammonia-oxygen fuel cell could be a solution to this, unlike water ammonia has a lot of energy (water can't be used as a fuel), the problem is the triple bond in nitrogen
121 2 . Reply
Arne . 2018-07-27
Urine can make ammonia much easier, but the best way to store energy is h2o2 and/or solar electrolysis of h2o.
121 2 . Reply
চৌধুরী তাহমিম . 2018-07-26
What if we burn it?
Maybe one day, we will run out of hydrogen.
Hydrogen is a free flowing gas on air but its to lite weight.
121 2 . Reply
Urban Woodworking . 2018-07-26
Thanks for sharing. Ammonia is a terrible fuel. If you can burn it efficiently, you'll get nitrogen dioxide which will do terrible things to your health.
121 2 . Reply
SEAN PAN . 2018-07-26
Can you mass produce it?
121 2 . Reply
yakyakyak69 . 2018-07-25
121 2 . Reply
topfuel29 . 2018-07-25
LOL- Lets make Energy by Using Energy. You're much further off to just use the electricity the first time. We live in an Electric World...
121 2 . Reply
Atlas WalkedAway . 2018-07-25
Put solar on your houses, fuck the grid.
121 2 . Reply
murdelabop . 2018-07-25
Please tell me this is satire.
121 2 . Reply
Robert Galletta . 2018-07-25
121 2 . Reply
Jim Barron . 2018-07-25
Please get the most basic principle of all right!



The problem with fossil fuels is not that they contain carbon. The problem is that they are used in a NONRENEWABLE manner: Instead of the carbon in the spent fuel being used to create more fuel, it is just dumped into the environment and ACCUMULATES. It it was reused it would not accumulate.

Just what part of "RENEWABLE" is it that our society is so remarkably incapable of grasping?

If any fuel (including ammonia) was used in a NON RENEWABLE way, it would INEVITABLY cause deadly environmental problems even if it did not contain a single atom of carbon.

It's NOT the CARBON. It's the LACK OF RENEWABILITY that's killing us.

What we desperately need to do is eject all of the religion out of schools (where it has no business) and replace it with courses on environmental management, evolution, biology etc.
121 2 . Reply
Jed Cruz . 2018-07-25
Read the comments and am so grateful that people still actually know their science! If ammonia leaks out into the atmosphere, it is a serious hazard. At scale it could deliver an major ecological disaster.
121 2 . Reply
red squirrel . 2018-07-25
At what cost though?
121 2 . Reply
Romulous75 . 2018-07-25
So the hydrogen produced is good for nothing. Because that would make sense.
121 2 . Reply
Romulous75 . 2018-07-25
Because carbon is black, it must be evil.
121 2 . Reply
Sapiência . 2018-07-24
Why so many inefficient steps if energy can be directly stored from sun into batteries? The best research bet right now would be increasing the energy density and charging cicles of batteries, as well as reducing it's cobalt content for environmental reasons.
121 2 . Reply
Nikunj Bond . 2018-07-24
back to fuel cells,this isn't gonna work.meanwhile batteries are better nd cheaper than this.more breakthroughs in batteries are coming.why waste time nd effort on fuel cells still
121 2 . Reply
SolarizeYourLife . 2018-07-24
Okay the title is BS! They talked about producing ammonia not using it as a energy source!
121 2 . Reply
G Mallory . 2018-07-24
'cuzz that worked so good for household refrigeration👌😉.

Add a step and make high quality carbon neutral Diesel?
121 2 . Reply
Every Thing . 2018-07-23
Disliked. Ammonia is a toxic chemical. Also the process is inefficient and you can just store the energy in batteries.
121 2 . Reply
simarjit singh arora . 2018-07-23
Why not store hydrogen instead of amonia save a lot of time and money which readily burn with oxygen to produce only water
121 2 . Reply
Gary Lewis . 2018-07-23
nuclear high temp or electrolysis is another option not shown here
121 2 . Reply
QuantumOverider . 2018-07-23
U cannot use power in the process, source of that is always dirty and causes lower efficencey.
121 2 . Reply