Ammonia-Based Fuels: The Future of Automotive Industry?

[@Ytc_]

You are doing the best job in finding alternative fuel progress unlike other mainstream medias. They only focus on EV. If anybody really care about environment, then insist manufacturers to make long lasting vehicles instead of use and throw cars. EV are good at portfolio where we need ICE and other power-trains as well. We need to take care of everyone, that is good for the society.

[@craigweems]

No mention of costs. Ammonia is currently made from hydrogen which is made from electricity which is made from natural gas. Now do you know why they don’t discuss cost to the consumer?

[@masonsmith858]

An early utilization of liquid NH3 as a fuel for motor-buses took place in Belgium during 1943. Emeric Kroch developed these ammonia / coal gas hybrid motors to keep public transportation in operation despite the extreme diesel shortages of World War II. This motor-bus fleet logged tens of thousands of miles (and there’s anecdotal evidence that some individuals used the ammonia pumps built for the bus fleet to fuel their personal cars during this period).

[@donedwards6414]

This is a fine example of why I love your channel. Nowhere have I seen a thing about ammonia-fueled cars. Seems to make more sense to use ammonia over other e fuels in racing cars. Also, probably some people are thinking of the ammonia they use to clean around the house. This is the ammonia that is used in industrial refrigeration and air conditioning

[@wilfriedschuler3796]

One need 10 KWh/kg to produce Ammonia. But if you burn it you will obtain 5,2 KWh/kg. So what is the benefit in ammonia? Wasting 4,8 KWh/kg whilst using it?

[@soulsurvivor8293]

​@@wilfriedschuler3796The production of the Ammonia can be exceptionally cheap using large scale Solar in nations like Australia, where we have a lot of near inhabitable land mass and optimal conditions for solar. As such, the entire process from production to use would be near zero carbon emitting. That would be the benefit. Alternatively, we can also separate the Nitrogen from the Hydrogen using a sort of reverse osmosis through a catalytic membrane. An Australian university research team is in the final stages of long term practical testing of such a process. Which is being conducted in conjunction with Toyota using their hydrogen fuelled vehicles. It has consistently produced 99.9% pure hydrogen from Ammonia and the Nitrogen can be stored for reuse in electrolytic Ammonia production, reducing the power required for and speeding up the production process. Efficiencies can be shaved here and there if you think laterally about potential solutions. But the entire point, and answer to your question more generally, is that the process for producing and using Ammonia as a fuel source, or fuel storage medium, is that it's a significant reduction to carbon emissions that is just as safe (Safer in most aspects) than petroleum products like Petrol (Gasoline) and Diesel.

[@malcolmwhite6588]

There are no magic different types of ammonia. ammonia used in cleaning around the house, is exactly the same as the ammonia used in refrigeration and some conditioning the only differences one is aqueous ammonia. In the other one is anhydrous -pure ammonia. Pure ammonia is a highly toxic liquid, when contained that will vaporise at room temperature burn skin and suffocate when Breathed in any quantity.

[@malcolmwhite6588]

@@wilfriedschuler3796 perfect just like EV’s magically using electricity provided from nowhere😊

[@darylcheshire1618]

Ammonia reacted with water is ammonium hydroxide which is used for cleaning. The ammonia for cars is anhydrous ammonia and is a gas at room temperature. It is easily liquified similar to butane.

[@fishyerik]

The boiling point of pure ammonia is −33.34 °C at standard atmospheric pressure, so your definition of room temperature is "special". So, you either need to keep it pressurized, keeping it cooler than that, or mix it with something to keep it liquid. The pressure required is not insanely high, but that requirement is a big disadvantage for use as a car fuel, especially as ammonia is seriously harmful in multiple ways, already very low levels in the air are highly problematic. The energy density of ammonia is actually low, low enough that other disadvantages makes it overall a bad choice for car fuel, that is, if "ammonia-based" means mostly ammonia, and not as low percentage additive to greenwash something else. Methanol on the other hand, is liquid under normal conditions, and besides low energy density, better than that of ammonia though, methanol have some intresseting advantages over gasoline and diesel fuel, besides the fact that it can be produced from hydrogen and CO2, or wood. Methanol can also be mixed into gasoline or diesel fuel, as a drop-in replacement for large part of the fuel, without big disadvantages or need for changing hardware or infrastructure. The advantage of ammonia, which could be relevant for the shipping industry, over methanol, is the CO2 needed to produce methane instead of N2 for ammonia, makes methanol inherently a little bit more expensive to produce unless you have some essentially free source of already concentrated CO2. But then again, replacing fossil fuels with e-fuels in general, and not very limited cases like racing, requires essentially endless supply of practically free energy to be viable. Remember, fossil fuels have energy already stored, so e-fuels are doomed to cost about as much as fossil fuels to produce, plus the cost of the energy used to produce the e-fuels.

[@RagedContinuum]

via web search I read that ammonia has half the energy density of gasoline and LNG.. has more hydrogen than methanol - if fuel cell technology converts ammonia efficiently into electricity then it should yield a comparable power source to fossil fuel. Furthermore, it's made in vast quantities and green ammonia continues to improve as a process. I think it will be a strong contender for transportation in the coming years because auto as well as oil&gas companies definitely want hydrogen fuel cells

[@fishyerik]

@@RagedContinuum HHV, Higher Heating Value of ammonia is about half that of the LHV, Lower Heating Value of gasoline, that's comparing apples to oranges. Comparing apples to apples, liquid ammonia the liquid alone, has barely a third the energy density of gasoline. Add the issue that pure ammonia is a gas under normal conditions. Also, claiming that ammonia is safe is about as accurate as room temperature being below the boiling point of ammonia, which is −33.34 °C. Pure ammonia is really nasty, hazardous. It doesn't burn or explode easily, but it's toxic, a toxic gas under standard conditions. Low energy density, reluctant to release that energy, being a dangerous toxic gas, that's corrosive on top of that, not properties of a great fuel. Possibly good for some PR/Greenwash projects. For the shipping industry those issues can be addressed, but overall cost isn't likely to reach acceptable levels in the foreseeable future. It would be great if green ammonia became cheap enough to be commercially viable as a fuel. We produce well over 100 million tons of ammonia annually as it is, and the Haber-Bosch process was invented well over 100 years ago, and have been very important process for a long time, that's unlikely to improve much further. Commercial electrolytic hydrogen production is also close to as good as we can expect it to become.

[@mathiasmang848]

@@fishyerik Yes, the heating value of Ammonia is significantly lower than the one of gasoline. But the stoichiometric air ratio of ammonia is also way lower at 6,1 compared to 14,7. That means, you can burn almost 3 times the fuel in your combustion chamber. That results in the fact, that the heating value of the actual mixture in your combustion chamber (i dont know the correct english term for that) is comparable to traditional fuels. This also means, that you have a higher fuel consumption but most experts want to use ammonia mainly in heavy equipment such als tractors or ships. And for those vehicles the extra weight of the fuel is not as relevant as in a car. Yes its also corrosive but mainly for copper and its alloys. So thats a disadvantage that can easily be overcome. Storing it as a liquid is no problem at all, as its being done already for millions of tons all the time. The pressures for a fuel tank in a vehicle would be at about 10 bar. Cars running on LPG are at roughly the same level. Cars with CNG are running pressures of 200-300bar without any issues or safety concerns (at least nowadays). But as you say, it is still hazardous and producing it environmentally friendly + cheap in large amounts is a big challenge.

[@fishyerik]

@@mathiasmang848 A lot of significant issues, none of which is an total deal breaker on it's own, I totally agree. Like requiring a moderate pressure is a relatively small issue, on it's own, but that pressure combined with being very nasty if, no sorry, when, it leaks, and low energy density makes it a very bad choice. Natural gas has some serious advantages as a fuel, one is that it is (typically) much cheaper than oil, in some areas, and have been even cheaper, still, it haven't really replaced oil on a large scale for vehicles, without incentives. The extra weight of the fuel and the tanks required makes a very bad choice for shipping, except short distances, and that would be a small niche. For long distances the amount of fuel required is an issue, it takes away from the capacity, and increase drag. For the biggest container ships were talking hundreds of tons, per day, of reduced capacity. For really short fixed routes battery power is a viable option, even if the energy density is much lower even compared to ammonia, and represents a much higher investment than ammonia tanks, batteries has some huge advantages. The potential window in between liquid fuels and batteries is small, and shrinking. Tractors, absolutely agree, weight typically is not much of issue, same goes for some other machinery that doesn't travel far. Also limited niche, and most cases are relatively well suited for electrification. I think autonomous electric robots will replace most conventional farming machinery, not so much electric autonomous versions of current machinery doing the same things the same way, but smaller machines working smarter, day and night if needed.

[@soulsurvivor8293]

​@@fishyerikThe relative safety between liquid petroleum products compared to liquid Ammonia is actually more favourable for Ammonia overall. There are minor and inexpensive means of altering existing petroleum and oil infrastructure to be used for Ammonia. Additionally, you can strike a balance between cooling and pressure with Ammonia that makes it idea for fuel storage compared to almost any other zero & near zero carbon emitting fuels. You don't require anywhere near it's liquid temperature to store Ammonia as a liquid at incredibly safe levels of pressure. Predominantly, Ammonia in itself isn't going to be a great fuel for anything smaller than most ships. However, it is an ideal storage medium for the distribution and shipping of low cost, low/zero carbon Hydrogen fuel. Hybrid Hydrogen/Battery EVs and Hydrogen ICE vehicles fill that gap between Ammonia Fuelled Vehicles and BEVs. And Ammonia is the best option for storage and transportation of Hydrogen to be used as a fuel. As for production, unfortunately there are few nations that are perfectly geographically positioned with enough usable land mass to produce enough Hydrogen and Ammonia via renewable powered electrolysis and none of them are the current Oil Tycoons. Which leads to the current fuel industry heavy weights kicking the proverbial ladder when ever and where ever they can. Australia is basically perfect for such production. However, the US has assisted in ousting one of our previous prime ministers for daring to consider Nationalising our resources. So, sadly not much can get done while everyone clings to fossil fuels like it's the only option.

[@BeamRider100]

1:49 At 125 PSI it will become a liquid. Still it can become a liquid and be transportable and there are already pipelines in use for thousands of kms. Definitely worth persuing.

[@Paul.Gallant]

There's one challenge with amonia, it usually involve NOx byproduct which is 300x more potent green house gas than CO2.

[@venkateshks6664]

good one thats something people tend to neglect and you rightfully ponted it out.

[@shawnnoyes4620]

he pointed out using Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)

[@soulsurvivor8293]

Not to mention that the Nitrogen was initially taken from the atmosphere to make the Ammonia to begin with, it not adding additional Nitrogen to the atmosphere like we are with petroleum fuels and CO², so it's a relatively neutral process even before using selective catalysts.

[@soulsurvivor8293]

Further more, if we ramped up electrolytic Ammonia production more nitrogen would be taken out of the atmosphere and be in long term storage like we currently do with Oil and Petroleum fuels. Meaning it would actively reduce the current atmospheric NO² levels dramatically while simultaneously reducing CO² emissions. So by your logic of NO² being worse, then we would be reducing it by that same proportional amount by producing and storing Ammonia. So basically, your argument actually works against your intended point.

[@soulsurvivor8293]

Further further more, Ammonia can actually be stored for way longer than petroleum and oil. Almost indefinitely if stored correctly. Because unlike oil and petroleum fuels, it's an exceptionally stable molecule that doesn't vent off aromatics and gases from it's liquid form in a fully sealed container like they do. Making it an unparalleled long term fuel storage medium. Should I continue or have you got the very basic concept yet?

[@Alan_Hans__]

Liquid based fuels are definitely a good option compared to batteries.

[@peterkotara]

Liquid based fuels fail catastrophically on every level. I mean no disrespect but I simply can't believe that media is still promoting this insanity.

[@jordanbrown7403]

Solar fuel plant in germany worth look at

[@hardware64]

No one is comparing this to batteries. It only makes sense for long haul travel

[@simplemechanics246]

Never empty tank, just pis s in and drive

[@sumedhsukhdeve9117]

Jajajajaja

[@dianahoward6024]

That’s what I was thinking.

[@jimcherry685]

I once lived in a rental that had an old ammonia-based refrigerator. You haven't lived until you experience an ammonia leak up close and personal. Household ammonia that we all know is just the barest hint at the real thing.

[@nicksonpinto2074]

Ammonia reacts with HCl to form ammonium chloride.

[@mmcm6692]

As a R&D research should try: 1 Jetropha & Ammonia as catalyst. 2. Various 33 types biofuel with Ammonia.

[@bgaoest2995]

ammonia like hydrogen, can be used in engine and fuel cell. waiting for next updates

[@selrahc2061]

A Canadian was trying to push it forward he even developed an at home ammonia Maker.

[@Greenammonianews]

there are at least 2 Canadian companies selling at-home systems. Some farmers use a lot of ammonia as a fertilizer. These units allow farmers to free themselves from commodity pricing swings. The cost of ammonia the companies advertise is a good deal for the farmers.

[@nolan4339]

While Ammonia is fairly easy to transport, it is still gaseous at room temp/pressure. It is actually most comparable to Propane for it's storage requirements. And in terms of safety and handling, it has displayed a much better record than liquified hydrogen. While it has a lot of benefits as a fuel, it is unlikely it will be widely adopted for transport vehicles, but as a fuel for powering remote industrial sites and equipment, as stored energy for backup power, or as a traded energy commodity, it has a lot of potential. Of course, just ramping up green production of it to displace fossil fuel derived ammonia would already be a huge step.

[@danieldunstone6128]

Pluss i predict itll be mainstream for cars roof to be solar panal even hood for extra power to act as hybrid

[@kitchongyue]

Good video. Technology immaturity was cited as a challenge, but I thought the biggest challenge is the cost of low-carbon ammonia, which is much higher than incumbent fossil fuels on a heat-equivalent basis. This is probably the single largest challenge that the market must work together to solve by imposing higher taxes on fossil fuels or subsidising for ammonia production or both.

[@soulsurvivor8293]

The only real hurdle for low cost, near zero carbon emission Ammonia production is that it requires nations within a specific geographical band near the equator to become the primary producers for the rest of the worlds needs. This, ofcourse, doesn't sit well with the US and other Oil/petroleum centric economies. More so the US and Russia than anywhere else. As the US dollar is tied to Oil/Petroleum predominantly, it's clear that the US and its massive private oil corporations would use any & all means of preventing such a dramatic shift in influence over global fuel demand. It's pathetic really.

[@joseveintegenario-nisu1928]

How much NOx produces Ammonia as fuel, compared to other combustibles? NOx is the worse of engine emissions, the rest is easier to control. In Carbon molecules fueled engines, NOx depend on Combustion temperatures, a hotter flame gives more NOx, but Ammonia is NH4!

[@mitsuesdeck]

it depends a lot of temperature and pression in the combustion chamber. For example, pure hydrogen produces enormous amounts of NOx, for this reason it is sought to mix it with another fuel to make it more viable.

[@joseveintegenario-nisu1928]

@@mitsuesdeck Yes, amount of NOx depend on Flame temperatures, the hotter the Combustion, the more NOx you get, but my doubt came from Ammonia, NH3, having N in the molecules, and from knowing nothing about how hot it burns. Ist this different from other fuels?

[@masonsmith858]

Roger Gordon has made this tech work, it is scalable and cost effective with about 85% energy yield of fossil fuels and can be retrofitted into existing petrol car platforms. Ammonia production could potentially be done in anerobic biodigestors using organic inputs and done close to metropolitan areas reducing transport. NH3 fuels were also used by military during war…It is clear that this tech has a future, whether or not the cartels allow that to happen is a different story

[@mail-qh2qc]

I believe is 60% as much energy as gasoline.

[@komolkovathana8568]

Ammonia (NH3) could be categorised as the same group as of Hydrazine (N2H4)-- Rocket Fuel, still used today.

[@Ps119]

how does its cost compare with gasoline and diesel

[@Greenammonianews]

I did some quick and dirty back-of-the-envelope math and it looks like it is equivalent to $1.1-$1.4 cents per liter of diesel. It depends on the cost of green electricity, capital costs, etc. but this looks like it might make commercial and environmental sense.

[@UndregoGrey]

Toyota apparently has a full amonia drive train. i'm just concerned about the toxicity of ammonia. it is fairly lethal to people since it is a neurotoxin if i'm not mistaken

[@eamonaugustine1262]

What does it smell like . Whats the by product ?

[@Greenammonianews]

Air and water.

[@komolkovathana8568]

Though NOx is reduceable by catalytic converter...NH3 itself is more CORROSIVE than Ethanol, (even less corrosive than Hydrogen (H2)). The whole Metal contact, Pistons, Rings, Cylinder jacket, The tubes, the Tank, the Pump, the Seals all transfer-system anew

[@ayulin9577]

How is ammonia safe to handle?? It's crazy corrosive in high concentrations, plus it is actually a gas at room temperature and atmospheric pressure and "liquid" ammonia is really just a solution of ammonia in water. So at least about 2/3 of the stuff in your tank would be just water, which REALLY drives down the energy density. If you use pure ammonia its really reactive which can cause a lot of trouble, and in a "safe" solution it's really dilute. Plus if it gets released into the environment it is still damaging, just like hydrocarbon fuels.

[@RagedContinuum]

a rugged check-valve system for pumps along with a well-protected tank would probably be safer than your normal gas-tank. Selling installable tanks similar to propane is another method. Propane tanks are used all over for forktrucks and they rarely cause problems apart from needing thermal gloves for the connection

[@iantaylor2926]

If the hydrogen economy is to become something real rather than a hoax to divert money away from renewable energy, then Ammonia has a big part to play in making hydrogen into something transportable. It could fuel ships and lorries to carry itself long distances without expensive infrastructure. Efficiency is an issue, but places with abundant solar resources like South Africa are already gearing up to export Green Ammonia. An Ammonia / Biogas blend may offer even more possibilities.

[@dougonutube]

Interesting video re. Ammonia-based fuel but I can only see it being relavent for existing (legacy) ICE vehicles. Your statement "...could revolutionise the automotive industry..." forgets that the automotive industry is ALREADY being revolutionised right now! We're now well into the S-Curve adoption of battery electric vehicles, so all new cars (pretty much) will be electric in only a few years (economic drivers, rather than political). So that leaves the very large number of existing ICE cars already on the road, and ammonia may well be an answer for them (after some hopefully minor engine mods). But if you think Ammonia will make any kind of difference to the new market... well, that ship has already sailed! There may be applications for shipping, but again, with the enormous strides being made right now in battery storage densities, wind/solar/battery powered shipping is almost certainly a more cost-effective solution in the medium term.

[@Greenammonianews]

When tesla started they did not really dent the metals market. The world uses a lot of copper for other things. But for us to really replace all the ICE with battery-powered vehicles would require a very large expansion of global mining. When supplies are short commodities get really expensive, who is buying if the cost of battery packs triples... If ammonia can substitute gas or diesel with little modification we may run into far less growing pains. Regardless, shipping & trucking will explore ammonia and in that, we will learn a lot.

[@allanallansson9532]

...and not a word about energy losses through the conversion processes or the costs. It is as if energy effiency is not of interest but still "a potential to revolutionize".

[@Greenammonianews]

There are several commercial green-energy-to-ammonia units available on the market today. Their specs suggest about a 70% energy conservation to make the ammonia. If you use ammonia in a gas fire energy plant it is about 50-60% efficient. The cost of peak power can be 10x more than green power so ammonia may be cheaper than coal or gas-fired plants. If you run it in place of diesel it has a different energy density but similar efficiency (you would use more ammonia for the same power but the power conversion would be about the same)

[@iancormie9916]

What is the efficiency of making Amonia from atmospheric N2 and Hydrogen compared to supplying Electricity for EVs?

[@Greenammonianews]

I read it is about 70% energy conservation. And storage is really cheap, steal tanks. EV storage is really expensive (batteries).

[@papagolf1]

Keep researching. Options are great.

[@inglbrute]

The term "safe to handle" when referring to ammonia is a little missleading when you' take into account it's basic toxicity. That being said, after studying it a little, I think it might be on the right track. Maybe.

[@malcolmwhite6588]

Not correct Chris, about ammonia being liquid at room, temperature and pressure. It boils at about -28°F in an open container and will produce a highly toxic astringent suffocating vapour, which is immediately fatal at about 0.1 percent by volume

[@jordanbrown7403]

Synhelion and h2il worth doing videos on and both have websites with plans going up to 2025

[@teyhoonboon5853]

Scientific breakthrough research produced variety of green energy for transportation, people have many choices to select the cost effective of green energy for transportation.

[@user-pt1ow8hx5l]

Hi. Ammonia is 'transportable'. Thus,........ Ammonia can be producered in remote areas,.... the western parts of australia......... for instance.... and shipped to Japan. Cheaper than hydrogen.......... The japanese have then figured out that why run on ammonia,.... as opposed to cracking up ammonia from Australia.......... to hydrogen...

[@larkguit]

What about the smell?

[@matthat8125]

what about ammonia cracker to fuel cells I know at least one Aim company has them. AFC energy

[@duncanlawson4002]

New process available to make ammonia, massive reduction in energy required. Air and water, plus standard air pressure and 45c , so a bit of electricity. Plus the unit to produce 100 tons per year would fit in your garage. Fuel Positive a Canadian company is installing first commercial set up on a large farm Q1 2024 ,

[@sev9204]

Ammonia, while offering potential environmental benefits as a fuel, presents significant hazards. Its toxicity can lead to severe chemical damage to the skin upon contact, and its gaseous form can cause chemical burns to the eyes. In the event of a car collision, the consequences could be dire, with the possibility of large quantities of ammonia spilling and posing a threat to both the environment and public safety. The use of ammonia as a fuel might be more suitable for controlled environments, such as in cargo ships and tractors, where professional handling can mitigate risks. However, for untrained civilians, the dangers are too great. Although ammonia-fueled vehicles emit less carbon, the production process of ammonia through steam methane reforming is carbon-intensive, which somewhat undermines its environmental advantages. (electrolysis also, but it produces very low quantities of Ammonia) Therefore, while it has its merits, ammonia must be approached with caution, especially when considering its use for personal vehicle fueling.

[@marymarlow5598]

Can ammonia deliver enough thrust with liquid oxygen to power a large rocket engine? I'm interested in what it it's capable of.

[@masonsmith858]

The X-15 rocket plane set speed and altitude records in the 1960s, powered by NH3. 1960’s!

[@staywhite6332]

That is many more steps added than simply, using gasoline.

[@evanpimley5933]

Using electricity has even less steps than gasoline. It also has the added benefit of not contributing to global emissions. Ammonia-based engines are for people who want a combustion engine because it "sounds cool" but also don't want to release as many pollutants when using it.

[@arlrmr7607]

A full tank might dissolve the engine before delivering all its miles! Obsolescence perfected!

[@konstantinkanchev9798]

Don't lie the people. Ammonia is a liquid at room temperature and atmospheric pressure. If - 33C is room temperature I am agree. 😂

[@h2opower]

This is one that is a no no as more than likely you have never smelled ammonia at these concentrations before as it's a choking hazard bigtime. It will stop you from breathing and furthermore if you are in an accident and the tank ruptures no one will be able to come near you as it burns mucus membranes big time meaning it is a serous choking hazard. Trust me when I tell you this death by ammonia is a very painful way to go. With ammonia vapor, concentrations of 100ppm or more will result in eye and respiratory irritation. 2500-4500ppm can be fatal in about 30 min. Because ammonia is highly toxic and corrosive it requires careful handling and storage which is not the case for hydrogen so I say lets just stick with hydrogen for as I said this is a very painful way to die.

[@masonsmith858]

They dont want this as it removes the strangle hold over politics, production and industry

[@Jerimiah-x8f]

So in essence a blend of coal gas diesel ammonia hysrogen peroxide qnd alcohol can make aj infinite source of gas? And good stuff too?cool

[@eduardodaquiljr9637]

If storing ammonia is not an issue compared to hydrogen,then go ahead,make it.

[@mongo64071]

If you need to use electrolysis to make ammonia, why not just store the hydrogen and use it in fuel cells? Much more efficient than ICE.

[@pauldatche8410]

So, how much energy is used to manufacture hydrogen and then manufacture ammonia? What is the roundtrip efficiency of the whole fuel per litre compared to just batteries which you keep recharging instead? Let's remember too how the fuel pump and governments are friends - the prices will keep going up and there will be little room for DIY when you want to go off the grid supply systems, as opposed to battery powered cars which you can recharge using Solar if you can install a good bunch of them.

[@RagedContinuum]

there's no free lunch but we aren't going zero carbon with current battery tech, and car, oil and gas companies want hydrogen fuel cells in the mix

[@AmigoDito]

I say some day we will be driving ammonia electric vehicles and battery electric vehicles will go extinct, because batteries can never deliver the energy density per kilogram of weight that a tank with a liquid fuel can. Ammonia will also make hydrogen go extinct, because ammonia is so much easier to store and transport. It's just a matter of time before direct ammonia fuel cells (DAFCs) will be perfected, and we'll have the same fuel efficiencies as the maritime industry demands, in our cars. The safety issues can be addressed with leak-tight fuel pumps and safe handling. This technology will also power our private boats.

[@Rospajother]

Problem one, clouds of death !

[@aldychristian7075]

di negara berkembang ini tidak akan diijinkan terjadi. karena akan menggangu ekosistem pupuk kaya nitrogen yang di monopoli oleh segelintir orang dan pemerintah. petani akan semakin mudah mendapatkan pupuk tanpa harus melewati regulasi dan harga yang sangat mahal.

[@engineerncook6138]

"Ammonia is a liquid at room temperature and atmospheric pressure." The boiling point of pure ammonia is -33 C at atmospheric pressure -- not a liquid where I live. Pure ammonia is highly toxic. Transport and storage of pure ammonia is prohibited in my state. The safety datasheet for pure (anhydrous) lists the hazards as: Flammable gas. May form explosive mixtures with air. Contains gas under pressure; may explode if heated. May displace oxygen and cause rapid suffocation. Harmful if inhaled. Causes severe skin burns and eye damage. Very toxic to aquatic life. Perhaps you should research you stories more thoroughly.

[@dougriedweg9002]

Farmers have injected ammonia into the soil for years, yes it’s dangerous but so are many products

[@bennylava8717]

CO2 is harmless as water. If CO2 is GHG, water vapor is also a GHG. Stop vilifying CO2

[@bindiberry6280]

NH3 the most re-collectable and recyclable fuel!!!

[@wilfriedschuler3796]

Wow, you are so brillant. One needs 9-10 KWh to produce one kg of ammonia. And if it burns one obtains 5,2 KWh. And what about the difference

[@nuttyDesignAndFab]

4:34 "hydrogen feels like its making advancements every day" lmao yeah that's how propaganda and vaporware works. it FEELS like it is, but how many consumer hydrogen vehicles have been sold, total? now compare that number to how many Teslas have been sold. that's just 1 manufacturer lol.

[@RagedContinuum]

battery systems still have range, power, and weight issues

[@RagedContinuum]

i just searched and it says :Ammonia has nine times the energy density of Li-ion batteries, and three times that of compressed hydrogen, creating potential as a carbon-free energy carrier.:

[@joedfazio]

I stopped watching after hearing “ammonia is a liquid at room temperature and atmospheric pressure”

[@stephensmith1553]

I know that battery electric is not the way forward I do welcome all new ideas for me hydrogen powered vehicles have now had a lot of success with a big rest on buses in London some years ago they proved popular with the public on the commercial side of things

[@AbdolazimHasseli]

Ammonia is not liquid at room temperature and pressure!

[@runeaanderaa6840]

The future is electric. This is because it is at least twice as effective as hydrogen or ammonium.

[@vjekoslavpavicic6575]

Lets tink we can yuzit amonia bat we mast yuzit laser plags ay tink tet mazda patent this laser plags

[@rjung_ch]

👍💪✌️

[@lucientjinasjoe1578]

And very toxic

[@KONGNO2000youtube]

===[[[[ thank you very much for uploading this video ]]]]===....... =======[[[[[[ thumbs up ! ! !... 433rd.,,,,,,,,,]]]]]]====== [[[[[[ see you again next time ]]]]]]

[@Brad14221]

Very toxic. Carry toxic around? Accident tank leak .. gas release harmful to human around that area. Very risky..

[@defruit2160]

Also can petrol

[@RagedContinuum]

There are probably 100s of thousands of propane tanks powering vehicles across the world but few incidents.. pressurized gasses in vehicles is an understood hazard that automotive companies can engineer for

[@pegefounder]

What nonsens.

[@anashab3mre40]

amonnia inerge perfct mor god nat hydrogen thes no rlaks no cpreted

[@zztops4504]

Piss in yo gas tank!

[@johnsherwin1104]

A low energy way to produce nitrogen is burn air (⅕O² and ⅘N²) at 5 psi pressure with solar hydrogen in a closed system giving N² and water

[@pauldatche8410]

So, how much energy is used to manufacture hydrogen and then manufacture ammonia? What is the roundtrip efficiency of the whole fuel per litre compared to just batteries which you keep recharging instead? Let's remember too how the fuel pump and governments are friends - the prices will keep going up and there will be little room for DIY when you want to go off the grid supply systems, as opposed to battery powered cars which you can recharge using Solar if you can install a good bunch of them.

[@bleydmcfaddin3843]

Recharge till the battery in the car goes tits up you mean or the programming or another electronic systems which then clashes with the programming