The alternative fuel of the future?

I mentioned the possible use of ammonia as a fuel the other day in a post about peak oil (see lower down) and having 5 minutes free this afternoon thought I'd have a quick look.

It seems that the technology is already just about in place. In fact nH3ydrofuel of Canada is literally on the verge of marketing a conversion kit allowing petrol engined vehicles to run on ammonia ($6000). Now at first sight that might seem a hefty price, but with petrol at $1+ per litre ammonia is comparatively cheap at ~50 cents per litre. The technology will also allow you to fill the special tank with LPG so you car effectively becomes a tri-fuel hybrid.

OK, so what are the environmental impacts of running an internal combustion engine on ammonia? The good news is that CO2 emissions are minuscule (you have to start the vehicle on petrol for 15 seconds in order to purge the equipment, but that's negligible) and once the ammonia feed kicks in it produces virtually no CO2. My immediate concern was that NOX emissions might be a problem, but they claim that they are only 25% of the NOX emissions from burning petrol. So this would appear to be an extremely environmentally friendly fuel.

They have filed some 20 patents covering all types of engines (including diesel) and several very interesting ones around power plants running ammonia for developing local electricity supplies. These also include patents for taking domestic, commercial and human waste and converting it to ammonia; the idea being that local authorities could generate their own electricity from waste that would otherwise go to landfill.

Despite the action of the Canadian government 25 years ago (Greg Vezina demonstrated a vehicle running on ammonia back in the 1980's but promised developmental assistance was withdrawn in preference to oil subsidies), ammonia energy technology definitely seems like one to watch for the future.

Remember, you heard about it first here on Junkk.

Addendum:
Just for the sake of providing balance, the potential downside to the use of ammonia as a fuel is that the only cheap way of producing it is from a natural gas feedstock, which is, of course, a finite and non-renewable source.

Addendum2 (via Junkk Male):

A welcome (if contrary) new contribution from, I believe, a new poster in the comments section. As this is an interesting and important issue I have updated the whole post, and it also gives me a chance to pop in his link hyperwhizzbang attached.

I think we need to figure a way of adding Dave's tip on how to do that on comments in the main body somehow. Maybe we should suggest it to Blogger?

Addendum 3 (Dave):
Geoff, thanks for the contribution. If you read through all of the posts in the forum discussion from the link you provided ( direct link above), it actually concludes that Ammonia could well be a viable alternative fuel, at least from a theoretical scientific viewpoint. "It takes 46 kj/mol to turn the ammonia into N2 and H2, then releases 363 kj/mol when you burn the H2. So you get a net energy output of about 317 kj/mol of NH3."

Addendum 4 (JunkkMale):

Greenbang - NEW - Chilled ammonia: the new carbon capture star - Would you like an olive with that? Not quite the right place, but the stuff is getting about!

"Driving towards a brick wall"?

So just what were the actual outcomes of the G8 meeting last week?

I found little in the outputs that made me feel any the more secure - it was all 'moving towards', 'look at', 'review our position', 'agree to think about' - all talk, and very little actual do or will, and certainly no actual definitive targets at which to aim. I concur that it was more of a 'tactical political shift', rather than a positive way forward.

So, rather than attempt to review the entire G8 gamut, this rather eyebrow raising item from freelance journalist Ralph Surette pretty much says it all. Although written very much from a Canadian perspective, I can't find anything in it with which to disagree.

The "Captains of no progress" are still at the helm, and the "dirty, lumbering supertanker called the world economy" shows but only minimal signs of changing course.

How far off is that wall? Is there time to brake and/or change course? How about listening to the G8 String Octet? Maybe they sound a little similar to Nero fiddling as Rome burned? Or the band on the Titanic playing as she slowly went down?
Fading out .... 'For those in peril on the sea........'

Thanks due to David Suzuki for the title of this post.

With a little help from our friends!

I am again indebted to Junkketeer Peter for not only pointing out the opportunity (which I immediately grabbed - now can I count it as 'coverage' in our ABOUT section?), but now kindly sharing the fact that we did score a mention (if not as submitted) in a Guardian online piece on reuse: Reuse it or lose it

Before going any further, may I appeal to any and all who may stumble across such a chance of promo for the site and/or a mention in the media to send it in this way. I am already struggling to catch up with just the last few days after my recent adventures. So any really helpful stuff flagged up is appreciated!

A quick comment on what we shared our glory with.

I was pleased to note that we were about the only non-individual (actually 'we' are, but it may be fair to say that 'I' am a bit more dedicated time-wise than most, if not 'professional'... yet) site in there. I say pleased only selfishly in terms of our commercial and even reputational prospects. It just seems odd and a tad sad that all the major funded Govt and Quango efforts seldom get mentioned? I'd like to think it's guys like us, FreeCycle and others who are talking to the public in ways they can, and obviously do relate to ( a couple of great new URLs for me to invite on the site today!).

Maybe they should just leave it too us... and help out a bit with some funds. Just a thought...