Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-09 09:29:13

SpaceNut ...

SearchTerm:FuelCell

I looked for any post by kbd512 containing fuel and cell, and came up with none.

I'd like to (try to) engage with kdb512 (and anyone else interested in the topic), as part of a discussion of conversion to an ammonia energy carrier economy.

My ambitions for this topic are added as an edit on 2019/04/18, below ...

To start the topic, here is a business report on a successful company which is supplying fuel cells to an existing market on Earth.

The connection of this topic to Mars is indirect, but (in my opinion) significant .... In order for humans on Earth to have the financial and other needed resources to develop a successful, self-sustaining community on Mars, humans on Earth must have the individual and collective wealth sufficient to be able to afford investment in off-planet ventures.

Conversion to an all-ammonia energy carrier economy would (presumably) provide opportunities for accumulation of wealth by multiple players around the globe, including those industries which currently derive income entirely or almost entirely from hydrocarbon energy sources.

https://www.bizjournals.com/albany/news … ation.html

The founders of the company described in the article at the link above and their investors (presumably) saw a market opportunity for fuel cells, invested the funds necessary to design, manufacture, market, distribute and support products. In the capitalist system, the founders and investors are rewarded when a vision of economic value is translated into a reality of satisfied customers and demand for more of whatever is on offer.

I am hoping that a similar vision for opportunities to supply an all-ammonia energy carrier economy will provide investment opportunities for multiple players around the globe.

2019/04/18 Edit: My ambition for this topic is to create a repository of information that any person, anywhere on Earth, would need or at least want, in order to create a vertical industry capable of supplying energy needs for a population, using solar energy as the primary input, and ammonia (NH3) as the energy carrier, totally eliminating the use of carbon for any part of the energy delivery cycle.

SearchTerm:IndexFuelCell

Aqueous Ammonia, 19% solution, link to paper on: Dated 2019/04/18 Author: tahanson43206

(th)

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2019-04-18 09:11:32)

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-09 09:38:55

For kbd512 ...

Copying this section of your recent post in another topic:

Ammonia Delivery Infrastructure
Long term, I can see NH3 delivery to homes to power a fuel cell outside the home to supply electricity for everything inside. That overcomes the staggering losses from attempts to transmit electricity over hundreds of miles. Electrical resistance is a PITA and we can't seem to find a room temperature superconductor after decades of searching, so stop fighting it just long enough to rectify the losses. If a solution is found, it requires new infrastructure and nothing is lost. The gas pipes are buried, so if there's a NH3 leak then maybe the vegetation above it grows a little faster. Since the NH3 is not inside the home, a leak outside the home can be detected by the foul odor. It's less explosive than gas and requires no methyl mercaptan additives to the gas to warn people of gas leaks. Either can obviously suffocate and kill. Ammonia can also be delivered to homes, transportation hubs, and industrial areas as Ammonia liquor when mixed with water. The liquor is heated to release the Ammonia, a plasma cracker splits off the H2, and the H2 is reacted with O2 in a fuel to produce electricity. The home fuel cell will just be another appliance outside the home, like a backup natural gas generator. It negates the need for anything but plastic pipes or the existing steel that carry natural gas. A fluoropolymer rubber or plastic won't rust, the liquor is only slightly basic, it's liquid at atmospheric temperatures and pressures, and the filtered water can either be recycled back to the plant to be reloaded with Ammonia or used to water plants at the home with a very low quantity of fertilizer added to it.

I'd like to invite you to develop your ideas for how a home power supply system could be designed to meet ALL power needs for a home on Earth, using ammonia as an energy carrier medium.

Ideally (from my point of view), the system would provide power needed to:

1) Supply all electrical equipment requirements up to 20 Kw.
2) Supply electrical power for heating and air conditioning (using heat exchange systems where practical)
3) Supply power to recycle water, including removal of all carbon from fresh water, and supply of needed nutrients for healthy supply to humans and other
4) Supply power to deliver fresh produce from hydroponic (and other) growing systems for local use (family) and for trade with others
5) Supply power for trade with others through the local network as needed to balance load throughout a community
6) Other applications I haven't thought of

(th)

SpaceNut · 2019-04-09 16:21:59

I see that discussion of the process and energy levels are still on going in the other topic as expected....

In either case the NH4 and H2O are still other flavors of a hydrogen economy discusion of which to get hydro to mix with concentrated oxygen means a lot of energy is going in to make the fuel cell work.

The main difference will be the energy for the electrolysis to gain free hydrogen for the fuel cell.

The next will be the mass to volume container needed to get an equalized energy out put for the same levels of Hydrogen to be mixed in the fuel cell to get power out withy.

Granted NH4 does have twice as much for H2O so its volume should mean twice as much power to come from NH4 as its more concentrated..

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-09 20:31:13

A 2018 report indicates that a study is under way, to determine the feasibility of building a special purpose tanker to carry ammonia and to power itself from the cargo, using either internal combustion engines or fuel cells.

I see this as a sign that at least one major economic player sees potential for significant growth of the use of ammonia as an energy carrier.

https://www.ammoniaenergy.org/pilot-pro … own-cargo/

(th)

SpaceNut · 2019-04-09 21:12:15

ammonium is NH4

To make ammonia we need energy to gather nitrogen and then to split water so as to put them into this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process with the thought process is to use excess power to do the work Renewable Fuels: Manufacturing Ammonia from Hydropower

Haber-Bosch (H-B) process. The process combines hydrogen and nitrogen over iron-based catalysts at about 500 degrees Celsius (C) and 200 to 300 atmospheres pressure to produce Anhydrous ammonia (NH3)
3H2 + N2 —> 2NH3

http://environ.andrew.cmu.edu/m3/s3/08formations.shtml

It takes 420 gallons of water to make a metric ton of anhydrous ammonia.

— Can be stored compactly as a liquid (much like propane) at pressures around 125 pounds per square inch (psi);

— Highest hydrogen density of any liquid (50 percent more hydrogen per volume than even cryogenic liquid hydrogen)

SpaceNut · 2019-04-09 21:35:24

https://phys.org/news/2011-09-pair-ammo … cents.html

To make the ammonia, the hydrogen produced is pumped into a compression chamber where a piston squeezes it, causing it to heat up; in this case to 400C°. The result is then allowed to escape into another compartment where a reaction is set off by an iron oxide catalyst. This makes the hydrogen grow even hotter to the point where it begins creating ammonia. The ammonia and leftover hydrogen is then allowed to cool down and decompress in yet a third compartment, and in so doing causes another piston to move back and forth creating energy that is fed back into the system to help lower electric consumption. Then, the ammonia is chilled to -75C° and pumped into a tank for use.
Cars already on the road can use ammonia as an additive without modification (up to 10%) and flex cars could be, according to Fleming, easily modified to use ammonia in conjunction with ethanol, allowing for a mixture of 85% ammonia.

https://nh3fuelassociation.org/wp-conte … elcell.pdf

http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/research/hyd … cPart2.pdf

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-10 06:49:40

For SpaceNut ... Thank you for posts #5 and #6, which cover the historical methods for production of ammonia as an energy carrier.

In recent years, progress has been made on production of ammonia directly from solar energy.

A few minutes ago, I asked Mr. Google: Australia solar ammonia

The top seven citations all provide glimpses of work that has been completed to enable Australia to deliver ammonia to global markets, using solar energy directly.

The top citation is:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/07 … out-carbon

In other topics, kbd512 has reported and commented upon the use of ammonia as a feed stock for fuel cells.

The purpose of this topic is to attempt to collect all the information an investor or (hopefully) a planet full of investors would need to identify economic opportunities for production of ammonia, distribution to customers world wide, and delivery of hydrogen to fuel cells.

The process to free hydrogen from ammonia is also relatively new.

I asked Mr. Google: process to free hydrogen from ammonia

The top eight citations all cover recent reports on methods for freeing hydrogen from nitrogen.

Putting this altogether:

1) Make ammonia using solar energy, drawing nitrogen from the atmosphere and water from the ocean
2) Deliver ammonia worldwide using tankers powered by the cargo
3) Deliver ammonia to homes and businesses using pipelines, rail cars, or tanker trucks
4) Consume ammonia to deliver hydrogen to fuel cells, releasing nitrogen back to the atmosphere, and hydrogen back to pure fresh water

It will not go unnoticed that since fresh water is a premium commodity world wide, the output from the sequence above is pure fresh water.

However, this water is NOT suitable for human consumption. The water from this process must be mixed with minerals to reproduce the mixture with which humans have evolved. The water CAN be used for industrial processes that require pure water.

(th)

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2019-04-10 06:55:36)

SpaceNut · 2019-04-10 17:38:42

quickly reading the documents I saw that energy inputs to be able to get energy from the fuel cell was depending on processes as low as 20% to 50% at best but we are still working with free energy source that we the consumer use to offset the higher otherwise costing power that we use here on earth.
Now for mars we the customer pays nothing for any energy created free or delivered but we can not operate at a negative and expect to expand mans presence on mars.
Even a planned exercise program to stay healthy comes with a waste stream costs and consumable use of energy even if we think of it as free and abundant.
I guess the other way to look at excess energy production is to reduce it so that its not excess if possible. Which is why we need a mixed energy sourcing for our power needs.

kbd512 · 2019-04-10 20:11:29

tahanson43206,

The oil companies and solar or wind or nuclear electric utility providers can and should use excess power that would otherwise be dumped into ground or flared off to produce LNH3 as a profitable transportation fuel. The CO2 captured from the Haber-Bosch process provides a further two profitable byproducts, namely virgin Carbon powder for aerospace composites or electrical conductors and LOX for rocketry or industrial processes. If we're going to extract resources, then we need to consume everything we possibly can. I call this concept synergistic production. It combines production of gas or liquid fuels for transportation and generation with production of the absolute best structures fabrication material known to man, namely Carbon, the source material required for CNT and Graphene composites. Dumping expensive pure Carbon into the atmosphere is an absurd waste of a valuable airframe fabrication material.

Pure Carbon is about $24 per kilogram or $24,000 per metric ton. The aerospace and automotive industries are in dire need of this material. Once we turn the oil companies onto the potential profits from separation and resale of Carbon powder from CO2, I sincerely doubt any of their leadership will even contemplate allowing their most profitable product, by weight, to go up in smoke.

This is not about achieving stellar efficiency with the overall process, however desirable that may be. This is about recognizing that the power would otherwise be squandered entirely. Unfortunately, existing Lithium-ion batteries are uneconomical when providers attempt to implement mass energy storage at national or global scales. The batteries can't be as easily transported as liquid fuels, on account of the much lower energy density and significant weight and fixed packaging. How do you swap a battery suitable for a backup generator or a car with a battery suitable for an aircraft? I don't think you can, but liquid fuels can be used in very different applications with ease.

If we want cheaper long term storage, then we can transport Ammonia liquor (Hydrous Ammonia) instead of pure Ammonia (Anhydrous Ammonia). The metal membrane plasma cracker is the key enabling technology, as it produces exceptionally pure H2 and near perfect separation of H2O and N2 from H2. The greatest property of LNH3 is that we have the Haber-Bosch process to produce it from gas (natural gas), liquid (oil distillates), or solid hydrocarbons (coal), reverse fuel cells integrated into solar cells, and the ability to use dirt cheap and plentiful catalysts. Alkaline fuel cells for automotive or stationary electric power generation use cheap and plentiful KOH catalysts. Aerospace fuel cells can use premium catalysts like Platinum or Gold or other precious metals. Whether we use photovoltaics, wind, natural gas and coal, or nuclear power as the electrical power source for heat and compression, there are a variety of readily available solutions at hand.

Any ship, rail car, or truck that uses stainless steel tanks to transport LCH4 can just as easily store and transport Ammonia in hydrous (liquor) or anhydrous (pure) form, with substantially reduced storage temperature range and pressure requirements in comparison to cryogens. Delivery of product via pipeline would be easiest using the liquor formulation because it stores well in ordinary plastic / glass / metal containers at atmospheric pressures and temperatures and pumping it is very similar to pumping water. You may be limited to around 25% product by volume, but easy storage may override other considerations. The left over water used as the transport medium would be retained and reloaded with Ammonia.

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-11 04:38:59

For kbd512 ...

Thanks for your concise summary of the ammonia industry and prospects for development!

I have selected one item (of the many you provided) to concentrate on next.

kbd512 wrote:

tahanson43206,
The metal membrane plasma cracker is the key enabling technology, as it produces exceptionally pure H2 and near perfect separation of H2O and N2 from H2.

Following up: Google search: metal membrane plasma cracker ammonia

12 citations on top page (615,000 results)

There is one patent citation:

US7037484B1
Plasma reactor for cracking ammonia and hydrogen-rich gases to hydrogen

Last edited by tahanson43206 (2019-04-11 18:30:04)

SpaceNut · 2019-04-11 19:17:21

If these we all that easy to build and regulate every home would have one already much the same for methane use. Its not in the electrical industries best view point to turn down there cash cow by creating a free energy system.

Myself I have been looking at the question of how can I build this stuff and to work with it safely so as to get that leg up on how much it does cost for power and energy use in general regardless of the fuel type.

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-12 04:34:15

For SpaceNut ... consolidating reply ... Thanks for the links you found for (a) the 1998 paper on Self Replicating Machines to terraform Mars and (b) the paper on cooling planets, which concluded with an interesting proposal by Gregory Benford, who is one of my favorite scientist/science fiction writers.

Regarding your post #11 ... While the Sun provides free energy, humans currently collect only a tiny part of the total output. Almost all of the energy humans do collect ends up in the economy as goods or services for which people exchange/trade. The same will most certainly be true for energy delivered using ammonia as an energy carrier. Your comparison of ammonia with methane is interesting, but the technology to make an ammonia energy economy practical has only recently arrived, and much of it is still in early development.

However, if present trends continue, an ammonia economy should become competitive with hydrocarbon, which is getting a bit long in the tooth.

Your closing comment, about citizens learning how to work with fuel cell technology, seems prescient! Young people today, who (hopefully) are learning the basics of computer programming and system design, could add physics, chemistry and engineering to their skill set, with a good chance the effort will pay off in future employment, or entrepreneurship.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2019-04-12 17:34:30

If its got Hydrogen in it its just another flavor of the hydrogen economy of which when we add nitrogen or carbon we are just changing how its stored and what comes from the burning of it with regards to global warming. Of course for mars thats not a problem and would not be for quite some time.

It was 2001 under President Bush that addressed the need for hydrogen
https://www.aps.org/meetings/multimedia … elhaus.pdf

Of course the hydrogen fuel has been around for a bit now and Nasa likes to use them quite a bit.

http://www.earth-policy.org/images/uplo … d19bcd2ce7

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40243-017-0088-2

https://cleantechnica.com/2009/03/27/mi … r-per-day/

MIT will announce its patent next week of a cheap, efficient, manufacturable electrolyzer made from cobalt and potassium phosphate. This technology, powered by a 6 meter by 5 meter photovoltaic array on the roof, is capable of powering an entire house’s power needs plus a fuel cell good for 500 km of travel, with just 5 liters of water.

https://steps.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/up … athway.pdf

SpaceNut · 2019-04-12 18:09:38

I remember the name in the article and I think we had topics during the crash years on the hydrogen fuel cells http://www.hydrogenhouseproject.org/index.html

The main issue for earth is regulations and danger of hydrogen.

I remember that there was a ton of solar cells that were used to split the water and it was stored in 1000 gallon propane tanks, about a dozen or so from what I remember.

So going with ammonia will see some of the same issues for those not understanding the regulations or the handling. This would also go the same for methane if we were making it from a sabetier reactor but I digress..

Its the free daily energy that we are capturing for later use in a storage method that we need in a safe an useable manner.

kbd512 · 2019-04-12 20:03:31

SpaceNut,

Assembly of the stack components of a fuel cell is simple, if repetitive. Actually fabricating the separator membranes and gaskets would be exceptionally difficult for an individual to do without very expensive equipment that loads the catalysts into the membrane material. In the same way that there's a lot of electro-chemical engineering going on in operation, there's quite a bit of that in the fabrication processes as well. The Balance-of-Plant (BoP) can be fairly sophisticated or fairly simplistic. A lot of that depends on power density and size. However, there are generally mass / volume / power benefits to integrated BoP.

I sincerely doubt that anyone here could make a solar panel, battery, electric motor, or combustion engine that anyone else would want to buy with what they have in their home. We specialize in knowledge and skills for a reason. There's only so much one person can know and do. Manufacturers focus on production of specific types of products for the same reason. You don't want GM trying to figure out how to make and refine gasoline and you don't want an oil company trying to figure out how to make a decent car.

From a mechanically standpoint, fuel cells are pretty simple. From an electrical standpoint, they're no more complex than a battery. From an electro-chemistry standpoint, there's a little bit of "magic" going on with that exchange membrane. That said, engineers and scientists have already "figured that out" for us. We need not "reinvent the wheel" here. What we actually need is for a major manufacturer, like GM or Toyota or GE or Siemens, to take some of their talent pool and determine how to scale up and automate the fabrication process to make fuel cells ubiquitous and therefore cheap.

We already have companies all around the world that can fabricate any kind of electric motor you want. Making a decent gas turbine engine seems to be limited to a handful of companies. The Russians and Chinese still haven't figured out how to make a gas turbine that lasts 1/3rd as long as the ones we're accustomed to. That pretty much rules out using less polluting sources like CH4 instead of coal. Both have figured out the Haber-Bosch process, though. If we give them the technology to produce Carbon powder from CO2 emitted by the Haber-Bosch process, then I think we have all the aerospace materials and engine fabrication know-how required to fuel a world-wide energy revolution.

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-13 07:04:57

For kbd512 in particular, and for all who may be interested in this topic.

Thank you for your support of this topic. It has significant potential for development, as your contributions have shown.

For SpaceNut ... thank you for helping to build momentum, and for keeping the focus on the overall theme ...

SearchTerm:VerticalIntegration

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_integration

The Wikipedia article at the link above captures some of the concept I would like to offer for consideration here ...

It is possible for a group of people (eg, the NewMars forum) to develop a set of ideas for a business application, and to do so in an Open Source way, so that anyone on Earth who happens to find the forum can freely pick up information that might be new to them, or perhaps gain insights that would be useful.

What I am hoping this topic will develop is a concept for a vertically integrated entity which would:

1) Procure ammonia from suppliers, with emphasis on direct solar conversion, but with flexibility as needed to meet competitive challenges
2) Distribute ammonia in the most cost effective way for a given set of customers
3) Provide end use equipment and services to maximize performance for customers
4) Provide outflow management

This last point is one that arises from a point made by kbd512 in a post above. In that post, kbd512 suggested that if ammonia is distributed in hydrous form (ie, mixed with water for convenience and safety) then the water recovered at the end user site might be "reused".

My observation is that if a pipe was used (for example) to ship ammonia to a home (in a city, for example), then there exists no pathway for the recovered water to be returned to the shipper. What exists (in a developed city) is a pathway for water from the home to the municipal water treatment plant.

My preference would be to concentrate upon making the water used for shipping, and the water recovered from fuel cell equipment, to be processed so it can be used at the home (or business).

Water for human consumption needs to be pure to start with, and then mixed with minerals in proportions observed in high quality water sources.

Water which is intended for use in agriculture (garden or larger) need not be given the same treatment. It is possible that if effluent water is delivered to soil, it will acquire the minerals plants need as it interacts with the soil.

After all, rain is pure water (contaminated only by air borne materials), and it acquires the minerals humans need by percolating through soil and rocky layers below.

In the end, the vertically integrated entity would compete with existing energy supply services, so the price at the home or business needs to be at least equal to and preferably better than whatever the hydrocarbon or other supplier offers.

(th)

SpaceNut · 2019-04-13 08:14:11

Side use of Ammonia which is used on the ISS
https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/ammoni … index.html

Here is the information for handling hydrous Ammonia Standards and Regulations
https://www.osha.gov/Reduction_Act/AMMONIA2.html
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulati … 0/1910.111
https://ammonia-safety.com/wp-content/u … ations.pdf

Removal of Ammonia in Water Treatment
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ie50354a010

https://www.wqa.org/Portals/0/Technical … mmonia.pdf

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/fi … -20-15.pdf
ACCIDENT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE MANUAL For Anhydrous Ammonia Refrigeration System Operators

SpaceNut · 2019-04-13 09:55:08

More reference points:

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files … eichik.pdf
Ammonia as Virtual Hydrogen Carrier

World production 150MM tons -current cost about $0.5/L
Energy density 4.3 kWh/L

Fuel cell company
https://www.gencellenergy.com/gencell-t … advantage/

Endorsement for
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10 … 00035/full
Ammonia as a suitable fuel for fuel cells

The raw energy density of liquid ammonia is 11.5 MJ/L, which is higher than the 8.491 MJ/L for liquid hydrogen and the 4.5 MJ/L for compressed H2 at 690 bar and 15°C

Something critical for keeping man safe around storage and fuel cell use areas
http://www.gcesystems.com/ammoniascrubber/
Ammonia Removal Utalizing an Ammonia Scrubber
Part 5 of Abating Hazardous Air Pollutants: Ammonia

Test vehicle
https://newatlas.com/csiro-ammonia-hydr … est/55805/

csiro-ammonia-to-hydrogen-fuel-cell-test-1.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&ch=Width%2CDPR&fit=crop&h=347&q=60&rect=0%2C204%2C1462%2C822&w=616&s=1e5626a6a64eb5c507d26393915ca47e

https://www.nh3fuel.com/index.php/techn … fuel-cells

https://www.cell.com/joule/pdf/S2542-43 … 0014-4.pdf
Production of Liquid Solar Fuels and Their Use in Fuel Cells

kbd512 · 2019-04-13 16:23:32

If anyone has better ideas that use technology we have, rather than technology we wish we had, then feel free to post that here. All I know for sure is that current solar panel, wind turbine, and battery technologies aren't overtaking fossil fuels. We keep burning more and more each and every year because we aren't pursuing realistic alternatives. It's possible for unscrupulous people to lie about where we're at, with respect to renewable energy, but the atmospheric CO2 concentration figures are easy to measure and that number keeps going up like clock work every year, without fail. If we're not so intent on achieving unrealistic results with impractical technologies or so apathetic that we sit on our hands until some new miracle technology arrives to save the day, then perhaps a paradigm shift can be effected.

NH3 production has the best Hydrogen economy of anything that we can realistically mass produce. We know this because we already mass produce it. We're not going to capture CO2 emissions from tailpipes or jet engines, so we should consider centralized combination fuel and fabrication materials production processes that use the CO2 captured from liquid fuel (NH3) creation since that's a lot easier to accomplish.

The Haber-Bosch process is not CO2-free, but this should be seen as an added bonus product if we commit to using the CO2 like so:

Capturing Carbon and Making Airplanes from It

There are an endless number of useful products that can be made from mass-produced carbon fiber and CNT, from aircraft and spacecraft, to turbine blades, to motor vehicle chassis, to furniture, to the strongest and lightest I-beams and rebar that the world has ever seen. CNT's might be specialty products that only see use in aircraft and spacecraft at first, but as production from CO2 emissions repurposing ramps up, we'll use CNT's in just about anything that needs to be fabricated, to include electronics, wiring, fuel cell plates, and battery electrodes.

To replace service-life-limited metals, we'll need many billions of tons of Carbon. Guess what we're dumping into the atmosphere at an astronomical rate? The stuff costs many thousands of dollars per ton to dig out of the ground and purify, yet all those expensive aerospace fabrication materials that we want so badly go up in smoke when we burn hydrocarbons. Apart from the energy required to convert it from CO2, it's otherwise F-R-E-E when obtained from centralized combustion processes, such as the Haber-Bosch process.

Metals will still be required for storage of liquids and gases, especially cryogens, but CNT's would enhance the resultant product in most applications. Production of petroleum products is still necessary, but those products can be put to even better uses in the polymers, resins, and lubricants that all future structures and machinery will require.

SpaceNut · 2019-04-13 18:29:01

Kbd512 thanks for post #13 as its discription is quite the same for all versus of electrolysis units or for a fuel cell from all of the stuff we have talked about including Moxie.
Of course while I would not be building any units for the purpose of sales we must learn how to repair with what we have on hand as parts will not be coming from the general repair man.

I must be unique in that I do many repairs and can fabricate items as needed mostly from nothing as I do not usually have the funds to buy them but I am all the time looking at how to build anything and everything not only to learn but to be able to change my stars as much as I can for as little as I can.

I reported from the documents the cost for non free energy creation of NH3 and its plausible level of power from it in post #13 which was

World production 150MM tons -current cost about $0.5/L; Energy density 4.3 kWh/L

currently PSNH is charging 9 cents a kwhr for power so cost wise to what it can deliver is 78% efficient for what it cost to create so free energy is the only way to go but even that does cost to set up to capture for NH3 creation. This is true for any hydrogen based economy....

SpaceNut · 2019-04-14 08:38:07

The draw backs for a mobile means of use of the hydrogen economy in any flavor.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 … -explained

The game-stopper with either of these vehicles—other than the sheer cost—was the impracticality of storing enough hydrogen to get meaningful range. The Hydrogen 7 could drive only 125 miles on 17.6 pounds of hydrogen, after which gasoline kicked in. Today’s 2019 Hyundai Nexo fuel-cell vehicle, on the other hand, can go 380 miles on 13.7 pounds of hydrogen.
In recent years, the efficiency of fuel-cell vehicles has passed the 50-percent mark—meaning that more than half of the energy contained in the hydrogen is employed to operate the vehicle. Hyundai, for instance, has said that the fuel-cell stack itself in the Nexo runs at up to 60-percent efficiency.
Storing hydrogen in a car still remains a hurdle, so the technology that can go further per precious ounce of hydrogen (that’s fuel cells) is the winner. The Honda Clarity Fuel Cell, for instance, goes 366 miles on its 12.0 pounds of hydrogen, stored at 10,000 psi and requiring three separate cylindrical tanks to maintain a practical enough package (even at that, the rear seatbacks don’t fold or afford a pass-through.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 … l-vehicles

To get the most out of the onboard hydrogen source in the fuel cell requires more oxygen than what is in 1 atm unit so we will need compression or a turbo charger intake to ramp up the levels for mixing with the hydrogen in the fuel cell.

https://www.autonews.com/technology/giv … s-can-zoom
CHECK OUT: This one 11-year-old chart explains the problem with hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles

Now using this for stationary power backup and surplus generation seems to be the best option for now. Being fixed also increase the safety and risk factors of hydrogen use as well. Such that it falls into the same arena as propane, methane or natural gas in that case.

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-14 08:41:21

for kbd512 ....

Thanks for this post, excerpted below ... I'm forcing myself to consider the possibility you may know what you're talking about. What this means, of course, is that I have to gear up to take the time to try to understand your argument. However, I can see a glimmer of hope that the time invested would have a payoff down the line.

The purpose of this topic (as I am imagining it) is to lay the groundwork for successful businesses which will grow on Earth, to support projects on Mars. Elon Musk has said (as I am remembering without doing the lookups) that his Earth-side businesses are intended to fund Mars development.

There is absolutely no reason why Elon Musk should be the only person who operates at scale for the same or similar purposes.

I know, by following the membership registrations that show up every day in the NewMars user list, that people from all over the world are opening this web site for whatever reason, and registering as members. The vast majority never post anything. There are a few individuals who post marketing material which does not relate to the mission of the web site, and their ID's and the posts are removed.

That leaves a large number of people who have gone to the trouble of registering on the site and then never posting anything.

I have to believe that at least a FEW of those individuals are capable of founding businesses capable of growth to SpaceX or even Amazon size, but the pathway from nothing at all to that level of achievement has MANY lower levels which could occupy an individual for a lifetime of productive labor.

(th)

kbd512 wrote:

NH3 production has the best Hydrogen economy of anything that we can realistically mass produce. We know this because we already mass produce it. We're not going to capture CO2 emissions from tailpipes or jet engines, so we should consider centralized combination fuel and fabrication materials production processes that use the CO2 captured from liquid fuel (NH3) creation since that's a lot easier to accomplish.
....
To replace service-life-limited metals, we'll need many billions of tons of Carbon. Guess what we're dumping into the atmosphere at an astronomical rate? The stuff costs many thousands of dollars per ton to dig out of the ground and purify, yet all those expensive aerospace fabrication materials that we want so badly go up in smoke when we burn hydrocarbons. Apart from the energy required to convert it from CO2, it's otherwise F-R-E-E when obtained from centralized combustion processes, such as the Haber-Bosch process.

For SpaceNut ... thanks for your follow up regarding the competition for a vertical business designed to deliver Ammonia to homes and businesses to replace hydrocarbon energy carrier systems.

My reaction is to point out that (to my knowledge) very FEW businesses start out trying to serve the lowest cost consumer. A notable exception is Amazon, which set out to sell books at prices well below brick-and-mortar prices, using the (at the time) New Fangled Internet.

Most businesses (again, as I understand the process) start out seeking to serve WEALTHY individuals, who are willing to pay a premium for goods and services because they can. If these businesses survive the brutal competition in the marketplace, they can engage in the cost cutting that kdb512 advocates, until prices are driven down to the point that more customers can consider them

It's not clear to me (at this point) which strategy might work best for design of a vertically integrated ammonia delivery corporation.

It might even turn out that opportunities exist in various countries to develop for different markets, having varying degrees of affluence or (in some cases) irrational attitudes such as opposition to carbon fuels in any form

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-14 09:09:32

For kbd512 (and all others who are interested in the potential market for pure carbon) ...

I asked Mr. Google about the market for pure carbon, and found this site:

https://www.outsiderclub.com/report/pur … y-for/2255

I was struck (in particular) by the amount of carbon the article at the link above shows for Lithium batteries.

(th)

tahanson43206 · 2019-04-14 09:23:50

For all ....

The purpose of this topic (as I am imagining it) is to inspire young people from around the world to consider developing businesses large enough to fund development of Mars.

In support of this concept, I was pleased to find a quotation of Jeff Bezos in today's Yahoo feed:

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/m/4b97b4d … A-why.html

Mr. Bezos makes the point that no market would have been identifiable for Echo, which runs Alexa, when it was invented by Amazon employees.

SpaceNut · 2019-04-14 10:54:33

Looking back at my earlier posts it would seem that a free energy source would be ideal for the power companies as they would earn 50 cents for every liter that they would make at a minimum and more after infrastructure building to support its safe use as supply power to the consumer.

For the consumer a gas pipeline delivery not much different than the current natural gas or propane still makes the supplier plausible for the consumers needs to energy again with consumer purchased or leased equipment to turn the ammonia into the form which they need and in the process return fresh water back for reuse rather than into earths ground water tables or into the oceans....

For the manufacturers of these devices there will be a constant supply and demand for more plus increasing size for demand as well. Which will foster a repair industry as well as the installer of these devices for the customer.

That said the market for use plus even the products which could be made and wanted by industry as well as the consumer alike are the only things to start being done to close the loop for reality. A willingness to manufacture is all that we are waiting for. If its priced correctly the field of dreams will continue on.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2019-04-09 09:29:13

Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#2 2019-04-09 09:38:55

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#3 2019-04-09 16:21:59

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#4 2019-04-09 20:31:13

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#5 2019-04-09 21:12:15

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#6 2019-04-09 21:35:24

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#7 2019-04-10 06:49:40

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#8 2019-04-10 17:38:42

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#9 2019-04-10 20:11:29

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#10 2019-04-11 04:38:59

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#11 2019-04-11 19:17:21

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#12 2019-04-12 04:34:15

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#13 2019-04-12 17:34:30

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#14 2019-04-12 18:09:38

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#15 2019-04-12 20:03:31

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#16 2019-04-13 07:04:57

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#17 2019-04-13 08:14:11

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#18 2019-04-13 09:55:08

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#19 2019-04-13 16:23:32

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#20 2019-04-13 18:29:01

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#21 2019-04-14 08:38:07

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#22 2019-04-14 08:41:21

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#23 2019-04-14 09:09:32

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#24 2019-04-14 09:23:50

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

#25 2019-04-14 10:54:33

Re: Fuel Cell Development, Application, Prospects

Board footer