British engineers: Zero-emissions planes that use AMMONIA could fly within years

[cancel2 2022]

.
Zero-emissions aeroplanes could take to the skies 'within years' thanks to British scientists who are developing technology that will allow them to run on ammonia. The collaboration between Oxford-based Reaction Engines and the UK Science and Technology Facilities Council could see ammonia replace kerosene as jet fuel.

Zero-emissions aeroplanes could take to the skies 'within years' thanks to British scientists who are developing technology that could allow a jet engine, pictured, to run on ammonia. Just like conventional jet fuel, ammonia could be stored in the wings of planes — but, unlike its kerosene-based counterpart, ammonia does not burn so easily on its own, making it far less of a fire hazard.

In order to be burned in a combustion chamber, ammonia needs to be mixed with hydrogen — which can be released from ammonia itself using heat and a catalyst. The researchers are proposing, therefore, to use a heat exchanger to warm up the fuel en route to the engine, followed by a so-called 'cracking reactor' to split some of the ammonia into hydrogen and nitrogen.

The fuel mix can then be ignited to drive the engine, with the only waste products being nitrogen, water vapour and perhaps some nitrogen oxides — although the latter can be removed from the exhaust using more ammonia.

'The fuel could actually scrub its own emissions,' Reaction Engines' James Barth told MailOnline.

Given that the switch to ammonia would, at its minimum, only require minor additions to conventional jet engines, airlines could make use of the cleaner fuel without needing to completely replace their current plane fleets.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ies-years.html

[cancel2 2022]

.
This same technology could be used to provide the fuel for hydrogen powered cars as well. The possibilities are mindboggling, Elon Musk you're toast.

[Matt Dillon]

Yeah, let's see them make it happen. Then I'll pay attention.

2 words:
Ice houses.

[cancel2 2022]

Yeah, let's see them make it happen. Then I'll pay attention.

2 words:
Ice houses.

This company AFC, which I have shares in, has already developed a fuel cell than runs off ammonia.

https://eepower.com/news/afc-energy-...drogen-source/

[Matt Dillon]

This company AFC, which I have shares in, has already developed a fuel cell than runs off ammonia.

https://eepower.com/news/afc-energy-...drogen-source/

How practical is it?

[cancel2 2022]

How practical is it?

Hydrogen powered fuel cars operate already, using ammonia as the hydrogen source is far more practical as it's less flammable, much denser and easier to transport. I see this technology supplanting battery driven cars in a decade or sooner. There are none if the attendant problems with the need for vast quantities of cobalt, lithium, rare earths to be mined causing huge pollution problems, reliance on the Chinese and huge human rights problems in places like the Congo.

https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-new...otential-70345

[T. A. Gardner]

Running vehicles off ammonia is not particularly new technology. It was first attempted in Belgium in 1943 by public buses due to the shortage of petroleum based fuels at the time.

The big problem using anhydrous ammonia is that it is an extremely dangerous health hazard if improperly handled. It can cause severe respiratory damage if inhaled, will burn skin both in gaseous and liquid form, can cause blindness if gotten in the eyes.

So, while you can use it as a substitute for diesel fuel in vehicles, storage and distribution would present a serious potential public health hazard. Using hydrogen in either liquid or pressurized gas form is probably the best long-term solution, but right now the problem is storage. Hydrogen leaks out of storage tanks due to the small size of the atoms. Until a workable solution to that problem is found, hydrogen will continue to be a great solution without a means of storage.

[cancel2 2022]

Running vehicles off ammonia is not particularly new technology. It was first attempted in Belgium in 1943 by public buses due to the shortage of petroleum based fuels at the time.

The big problem using anhydrous ammonia is that it is an extremely dangerous health hazard if improperly handled. It can cause severe respiratory damage if inhaled, will burn skin both in gaseous and liquid form, can cause blindness if gotten in the eyes.

So, while you can use it as a substitute for diesel fuel in vehicles, storage and distribution would present a serious potential public health hazard. Using hydrogen in either liquid or pressurized gas form is probably the best long-term solution, but right now the problem is storage. Hydrogen leaks out of storage tanks due to the small size of the atoms. Until a workable solution to that problem is found, hydrogen will continue to be a great solution without a means of storage.

150 million tonnes of ammonia are handled safely every year by bulk transport, whether by road or sea. There will be no need to store hydrogen as the technology is now available to convert ammonia to hydrogen at the point of delivery. There is no need to pump ammonia into a car fuel tank so 1943 Belgium has little relevance here. Storing ammonia in the wings of a plane is actually safer than aviation fuel as it is less flammable. It is also extremely volatile so would evaporate very quickly in the event of an accident.

https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-new...otential-70345

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hydro...170000421.html

[T. A. Gardner]

Million of tonnes of ammonia is handled safely every year, there will be no need to store hydrogen as the technology is now a available to convert ammonia to hydrogen at the point of delivery.

The problem is that ammonia has a much lower energy density than liquid hydrogen so if the later can be stored efficiently, that's the way to go. As for safe handling... if use in vehicles were to occur on a widespread basis, you would have people that weren't trained in its handling working with it and that could lead to problems...

The other issue is that it is a precursor to manufacturing a whole raft of different high explosives and having it everywhere in its pure form could be a problem in that way.

[cancel2 2022]

The problem is that ammonia has a much lower energy density than liquid hydrogen so if the later can be stored efficiently, that's the way to go. As for safe handling... if use in vehicles were to occur on a widespread basis, you would have people that weren't trained in its handling working with it and that could lead to problems...

The other issue is that it is a precursor to manufacturing a whole raft of different high explosives and having it everywhere in its pure form could be a problem in that way.

There's a lot more to it than that, this paper explains in great detail.

Abstract
Hydrogen storage and transportation technology is essentially necessary to realize hydrogen economy. Hydrogen can be stored in many different forms, as compressed or liquefied hydrogen in tanks, or as hydrogen carriers: a hydrogen-absorbing alloy, metal hydrides with light elements, organic hydrides and carbon-based hydrogen storage materials. Among them, solid-state hydrides with light elements such as MgH2, Mg(BH4)2 and NH3BH3 possess high hydrogen capacity, 7-20 mass%, However, the practical volumetric H2 density is below 8 kgH2/100L because the packing ratio is down to 50%. Ammonia is easily liquefied by compression at 1 MPa and 25°C, and has a high volumetric hydrogen density of 10.7 kg H2 /100L. The volumetric hydrogen density is 1.5 times of liquid hydrogen at 0.1MPa and -253°C. The vapor pressure of liquid ammonia is similar to propane. Moreover it has a high gravimetric hydrogen density of 17.8 mass%. Ammonia is burnable substance and has a side as an energy carrier which is different from other hydrogen carriers. The heat of formation of ammonia is 30.6kJ/molH2. The value is about 1/10 of heat of combustion for hydrogen. Ammonia has also advantages in cost compared with H2 and convenience as a hydrogen energy carrier for fuel cell vehicles, solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC), gas turbines of electric power plants and engines of air crafts, ships and trucks, although it is deleterious substance. Power to ammonia is a promising technology which converts renewable energy to liquid fuel.

https://nh3fuelassociation.org/wp-co...ugu-kojima.pdf

[moon]

British engineers: Zero-emissions planes that use AMMONIA could fly within years

What happened to Ocean Thermal Energy Converters using ammonia, Comrade maggot ?


Further- who is going to want to fly between war-ravaged , climatically- defunct, virus-infected failed states in a British Ammoniaviation Fiesta Farage ?


Haw, haw, haw, haw...................................haw.