Hydrofuel NH3 (ammonia) Car

[MichaelBranum]

an ammonia burning generator could sell great and recharge an electric car,take the easy path of building and selling ammonia burning generators

[gregvezina]

Hydrofuel Inc. to release a new 1 MW #Solar #Vortex #Gen-set and 1000 HP Sterling Engine next month.

To cost about $100.00 per KW or HP - "INSTALLED" - for free operating Electical or mechanical POWER. Equipment will have 10 Year warrenty.

[ourtrashcans]

I guess its just not simple enough to force upon our gas station attendants.

[glennjgd]

The big Oil corporations are trying their best to stop free energy ideas from spreading to common ppl.

We need to put an end to this corruption ,start generating your own electricity now.

Visit LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM and get the blueprints . Join the Revolution!!

[lespaul49]

@glennjgd

it's these type of websites that give free energy a bad name, I bought the plans, found out it was only free wind power for turbine

[skysurfern1]

Hi I am trying a documentary about alternatives energies. Are you the real Greg Vezina ? If so It's such a honor talk to you. Can you explain better how HN3 can be used as fuel and the modifications made.

[EclipseNowBlog]

Because of the laws of physics one loses an enormous quantity of energy splitting water to get all the hydrogen we'd need for the world's cars. Dr. Ulf Bossel is the European head of the fuel cell council, and great-grandson of the guy who invented the fuel cell, and even with fuel cells he says hydrogen is a stupid idea because it wastes so much energy to make it. If we have electricity from abundant nuclear power, charge "Better Place" cars with instant battery swap range extension. Solved.

[gregvezina]

There are many other ways* to make NH3 other than electrolysis. When low cost “off peak or stranded” renewable and possibly nuclear energy (with no nearby market or user) are used, the efficiencies and economics of making and transporting NH3 to generators for re-conversion into higher price “peak power” works. Being the only practical way to store electricity, energy losses and production costs are offset by higher revenue and lower transmission costs making it viable and greener. (*more below)

[gregvezina]

* Hydrogen is not a practical alternative, Ammonia (NH3) is. The infrastructure already exists, it is safer, easier to handle, more economic and less complex. NH3 can be manufactured using waste (animal, agricultural, human and wood etc.) and many other feedstocks and new and long practiced technologies. What is really required is full cost accounting which must include environmental, health, trade, tax and monetary cost components. With a level playing field ammonia is the only viable answer.

[EclipseNowBlog]

@gregvezina

The great problem with relying on waste is volumes! if it's not going to crank up to the 20 mbd oil consumption American's use, then it's a false hope. Better Place electric cars CAN be scaled up, and 4th Gen S-PRISM nukes *eat* nuclear waste. We could run the world for 500 years JUST on the waste we already have (which should be renamed once-through fuel). Nuclear powered cars, now we're talking!

[gregvezina]

Further Quotes;

"Ammonia has been used as fuel many times in the past. During World War II, busses in Brussels, Belgium were running on ammonia. Since then, there have been cars, buses, tractors and even jets powered by ammonia...there are many benefits to using ammonia as a fuel...there are zero carbon dioxide emissions and at least 25% less NOx emissions when burnt in internal combustion engines...it is widely produced at prices that are less than or comparable to gasoline and diesel."

[gregvezina]

This Report is "Public Domain" Anyone can use it. "The Business Case for Ammonia as Fuel in Agricultural Operations"

27 March 2009, Submitted by: Matthew Zipchen, B.Com, M.P.P.

Élan Consulting, 362 Waterloo Crescent, Saskatoon, SK S7H 4H6

(Note: I had difficulty attaching the actual link, kept getting an error message. To get it please search the report name in quotes above.)



Description

[EclipseNowBlog]

@gregvezina

1. Internal Combustion Engines are a 19th Century technology that needs to be retired. Such a small amount of energy actually gets to the wheels! We're burning chemical energy to create forward motion, and it is incredibly inefficient as so much of that energy is wasted as head. (Thermodynamics at work against us)

2. Electric engines are just more efficient. More energy gets to forward motion.

3. Saving electricity AS electricity is more efficient.

[gregvezina]

There is a huge difference between theory and commerce. Yes electricity is more efficient and yes it is better to use it than store it. But, 95% of the vehicles and generators in this world are not new or purchased every year. The primary market is retrofit. What we propose satisfies that sector quite easily and economically. We have plans for the electric vehicle and engine market as well, but they are "Trade Secrets". When our Patent issues are resolved they will become known and evaluated.

[EclipseNowBlog]

@gregvezina:

Oil currently sells at $1.30-ish per litre here in Australia. Shai Agassi of Better Place thinks he can sell km's of travel at an equivalent price of about $0.80 cents a litre and cheaper as the battery technologies improve.

I applaud your efforts in retrofitting cars and working on energy independence and preparation for peak oil, but ultimately the laws of thermodynamics currently favour electric cars.

[gregvezina]

If most vehicles used batteries how would we supply the electricity needed, from Oil, Coal, Hydrocarbons, Nuclear, Wind, Solar, Crops? Ammonia will be part of the solution. Think about V2G (vehicle to grid) in conjunction with NH3. Estimate the electrical generating capacity if engines in vehicles worldwide were electric, and if they made electricity instead of drawing it from the grid. With on demand as need local power, large power plants, long distance transmission or a grid will be obsolete.

[EclipseNowBlog]

@gregvezina: I forget the actual figure, but can't something like 70% of the fleet be run by off-peak power after 12am, when the demands of big business and industry have died down?

In other words, the power is already there! Better Place car charging systems 'talk' to the grid and are programmable by the owner to charge during cheapest times. Eventually we'll need more electricity which can be met far cheaper and easier by Gen4 reactors than tinkering with biofuels.

[EclipseNowBlog]

@gregvezina

Also, what's the energy cost in making ammonia? How much energy does it cost to run Haber-Bosch to get the nitrogen? You're only disguising the problem if we're making ammonia from coal-power! There is not enough ammonia in the world to run Australia, let alone America. You're proposing massive inefficiencies built into the system if you think our cars are going to run the grid, because we have to manufacture all that ammonia, AND then build the V2G car grids. I say Nukes + EV's.

[gregvezina]

I did not say anything was absolute. The solutions will be many and use different technologies, some old and some new. Do the calculations. I have. In our new book, 400+ pages with over one million pages of back up research, we propose real, practical and viable solutions, short, medium and long term. When it is released later this year, please read it and we can continue this discussion then. There will always be trade offs between efficiencies, costs, complexity and capacity.

[sgrannel]

@EclipseNowBlog It would appear EV is preferred because electricity can be generated with nukes and then distributed with minimal losses. However, a significant portion of applications, for example, 10-20 ton fishing vessels, aircraft and long haul trucks, will never use EV because batteries are too heavy. Ammonia can be made with nukes at 40% LHV efficiency, and burned at 40-50%. The efficiency of Nuke-NH3-IC engine may compare favorably with Nuke-grid-charger-battery-cont­roller-electric motor.

[EclipseNowBlog]

@sgrannel:

Sounds brilliant! We're on the same page then. It's all about scale and priorities if I'm right on how urgent peak oil will be. I've been looking for that niche fuel for the heavy vehicles and shipping that can't just be switched to batteries, and so this could be it. Cheers!

[mongoose100989]

hydrogen is very flammable. which is good for combustion of the engine i guess.

its weird how she sed its hydrogen mixed with a little nitrogen when the individual molecule is nitrogen with hydrogen atoms covalently bonded around the center (nitrogen)

[mollytherealdeal]

Dear Greg,

I have some questions:

1) How will the liquid ammonia be produced?

2) How much of it can be produced?

3) How much will a gallon cost in US dollars? If you how much a liter will cost in Canadian dollars, that would be good too.

4) How much will it cost to retrofit a car?

5) Is there an additional cost to mass produce liquid ammonia powered cars?

6) What is the range of the cars?

Thank you.

[gregvezina]

Answers:

1) Using Natural Gas or Coal, capturing the CO2 and new technologies using renewable energy and waste.

2) Today we produce enough to fuel 5-10% of all vehicles, within 5-10 years to fuel all vehicles and generate all electricity.

3) Half the price of hydrocarbons without taxes or carbon credits for NH3 or against hydrocarbons.

4) $5,000.00

5) Actually, electric vehicles that use NH3 as energy storage to make electricity would cost less.

6) 75 -100% depending on vehicle type

[TRUCKERMcD]

Has any considered the dangerous aspect of using NH3? This stuff can be and is nasty! I'm delivering this to tank farms that then, take it to farms where it is used as a fertilizer. I got a whiff of this the other day and I was wearing a full face respirator. Do a Google search on "Anhydrous Ammonia Spills" and watch what happens when this is released into the air accidentally.

[gregvezina]

There have been several studies about the safety and handling of NH3 when used as an automotive fuel. In Canada one was commissioned by the National Research Council of Canada (NRC), in the US one was done by the US Department of Energy (DOE) and in Sweden. There are also umbrella organizations in the US and around the world working on ammonia fuel safety and handling. All studies to date have concluded that due to the fact that it is non-flammable, it is considered far safer than other fuels.

[gregvezina]

In a crash sufficient to rupture the steel fuel tank, if the vehicle was fueled by any other, it would not be survivable. In addition, ammonia is lighter than air and will dissipate in most cases. There are simple and reasonable precautions that should be taken.

[unillenium]

Despite what Mr. Vezina says Ammonia is extremely toxic (albeit great for the environment as a whole). Non flammable is a bit of a half truth, in the presence of hydrocarbons and nitrogen(both commonly found on highways) it is extremely explosive.

it would take about 400mg (a tiny little drop) to be immediatley fatal to everybody in an area the size of an automobile. I.e. if a fuel line was ruptured in an accident and vented UPWARDS into the passenger area of the car.

[gregvezina]

Once again, facts are what counts. Anything, including water, is toxic, in large enough quantities. Ammonia is caustic and can cause chemical burns. Safety is designed into all our systems including lock and excess flow valves. The interior of the vehicle is sealed. NH3 is classified by the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineering) as a non-flammable gas and cannot ignite without a continuing hot spark or flame and a very narrow range of fuel to air (FTA) mixture.

[gregvezina]

It will not burn in open air, nor will it continue combustion without continued flame and FTA ratio. All hydrocarbons will burn once ignited. A drop is not fatal or harmful if you can get air, or water to dilute it from burning the skin. Try surviving a ruptured gasoline, propane or CNG line, usually it is not survivable. A ruptured NH3 line would not cause harm in most circumstances, and even if it did, it would be survivable. NH3 handled properly is as safe as or safer than all other fuels.

[gregvezina]

The government buried the report and had it removed from the "Library of Parliament" in Ottawa. The official policy discouraging the development of NH3 energy and subsidizing hydrocarbons including ethanol continues.

The rest of the story will be in my new book, "NH3 the Global Solution" to be released in a few months. If you google "ammonia motors" you will see that NH3 was used to power engines and vehicles, and for solar applications relating to indoor water supply 100 to 150 years ago.

[amasiafisher]

Greg..I would love to talk with you regarding some of the problems dogging your project. I have been working with a group in the US developing an alternative fuel option that is experiencing some of the very same issues. Please contact me. My company is AmasiaIntl

Thanks,

BFisher

[mucktractorboy]

why did you park it if it worked so well?

[gregvezina]

The Canadian Government introduced a policy to only support energy solutions related to hydrocarbons, primarily oil and CNG. In the 29 years since we started, our government gave over $100 Billion dollars in grants, subsidies and tax incentives to the brown energy sector.

The NRC (National Research Council of Canada) did a study of our technology in 1984 and concluded that NH3 was a viable, economic and environmentally superior technology and the Government should investigate & support it.

[ghvezina]

Cities make a huge mistake when they allow their garbage and municipal landfills to be mined for methane by utilities, who leave the rest of the garbage behind and take the cream and profits. Better we use existing technologies such as calcination to turn it into NH3 and carbon powder which can be used to make carbon fiber building materials. We spend billions of dollars flushing human and animal waste into water treatment plants when for a fraction of the cost we could make NH3.

[ghvezina]

If we had full cost accounting and the environmental costs of all energy was paid by the users, green sources and use of NH3 would be far cheaper than all others. The final fact that we should consider, is the billions of dollars we send out of our economy to purchase energy, destroying our economic base and allowing foreign interests to use our money to buy up our industries and control our economies.

[ghvezina]

As an energy currency, NH3 can be made from electricity and turned back into electricity. No other energy source (except hydrogen itself, which is costly and dangerous) can do this. In the new rush to electric cars, we should be aware that the electricity will be made primarily from coal and nuclear energy. Using NH3 for load leveling and storing electricity is practical and economic today.

[pHzerodotcom]

...of energy, again obtained from fossil fuels. I cant understand how he can say that this is the "fuel of the future"

[ghvezina]

Ammonia (NH3) can and is also made from renewable resources. Human, animal and agricultural waste being the most cost effective sources. As far as making NH3 from hydrocarbons such as coal or natural gas, the CO2 can be easily and economically captured. The only element missing is full cost accounting for the environmental costs of using hydrocarbons and nuclear energy directly. There are also new processes for making NH3 on a small and green scale.

[pHzerodotcom]

Ammonia (or azane as it's actually called) is NOT a mixture of hydrogen and nitrogen, its a compound, which requires fossil fuels and energy to make. First, the hydrogen is made by reacting natural gas (methane, a fossil fuel) with water, producing carbon monoxide. Then more fossil fuels are burnt in air to remove the oxygen and create CO2. The CO2 is removed, leaving nitrogen. The hydrogen and nitrogen are reacted at about 200 atm pressure and 400 degrees celcius, using collosal amounts...

[Chaoschemiker]

"ammonia is all around us."

What a stupid phrase.

Well, you have a lot of ammonia all over the atmosphere but did you ever sit in any chemistry-lesson at school?!

On the industrial side, ammonia is produced from the elements H2 and N2. But this hydrogen doesn't come from "anywhere".

Its produced by splitting of Methane with Water to CO and H2. You should handle with damned Basis of industrial-area. You can't say "Wow, its so clean and sooo good."

[Chaoschemiker]

If you've never handled with the Haber-Bosch-Synthesis of Ammonia.

It's everything else than "efficient" and "good". 15% of the educts will react. The rest ist recompressed to 300bar and heated to ~450°C.

And now: Think about, if every great guy haves a "clean" Ammonia-car.

If a better Ammonia-Synthesis is developed: great! But so long, this hasn't happen, a ammonia car is nearly rubbish.

Handle with facts. Not with dreams.

What uses the best planning if it is impossible? Make it possible first

[WHITEHOUSE1960]

ammonia is the answer open your eyes! ammonia is all around us. It is the cleanest burning fuel next to hydrogen and water

This will be the future source of energy and is the gateway to the hydrogen economy

Ammonia can be stored as a liquid and and is a rich in hydrogen through electrolosis solving the storage problem of hydrogen.

Pure ammonia can be burned in the internal combustion engine

even the intrstructure needed is partially in place. Ask any farmer in America knows about ammonia

[vmelkon]

There is another technology and you can search for the word gallium and find it. It is an alloy of gallium and aluminum. Add water, the Al react with the H20, forming Al2O3 and H2. The reaction is fast. In the end, you get Gallium and Al2O3 which can be recycled. Problem is that making Al produces a lot of CO2.

[soylentgreenb]

Why would you want to waste natural gas in making ammonia if you're just going to burn it?

It makes a little more sense if you use ammonia as an energy carrier for electricity from renewable or nuclear power. But that technology is still ramping up.

[agungk]

focusing on non-primary source of energy, we often mislead ourselves into thinking this is it. the energy for the future.

many point fingers on the big corporations or government cover-ups, when the reality it was economic and practicality factors that have swept these under the carpet.

[Voice0fEnergy]

Conspiracy theories notwithstanding, no government is capable of suppressing a good idea indefinitely. There are 6 billion of us and only a few dozen million of them.

We dont need governments to develop and promote technology, we need to do it ourselves.