Making methane from windpower

I didn't know they could do that...

Considering we here have a pretty well-developed natural gas infrastructure...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100505113227.htm

Almost certainly not as efficient as electricity-only storage, using batteries...but we have an existing natural gas infrastructure that might make it desirable anyway.

If nothing else, these guys should produce micro-model packages with a wind turbine included-warehouse forklifts all run on methane.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Methane is a good way to go . I built a dairy , (It was featured on the discovery channel ) a carousel milking facility is what I call it , Of point . The electricity is made from methane generators and the methane comes off the lagoon from the cows manure. Works pretty good and burns methane that would normally just go up in the atmosphere. Dump sites are starting to utilize the technology also. You see requirement is to tube up to release the methane , but the requirement is to burn off the methane coming from the tubes . So instead of just burning it off the idea is to burn it as fuel converting it to electricity . It is being done as we speak .
The best option in energy conservation in my opinion is ground source heat pumps for heating building structures in cold weather climates . You take the natural heat from the ground which is about 54 degrees to start with and then the air does not have to be heated as much as the out door temperature of lets say anything below freezing ( as an example ) The differential is less so less energy is used to heat the air. It is one of the solid items in green technology that works and typically there is a pay back at some point for the higher cost of using the technology , unlike photo voltaic where as the equipment will brake down before a pay back occurs. Photo Voltaic are considered more of a social responsibility. Maybe coupled with Ground source heat pumps , but the cost of product and instillation would be high. Only affordable by upper middle class to upper class people. Some of the subsidized housing around here is using both though , some with community gardens too . Obama money at work . Just Joking most of the money came from before Obama took office .
Hydrogen I think is the best option . Plenty to overcome before it is reality though . Most appliances can be modified to burn methane . Cars and what have you . The holes in cook units or gas furnaces need altering where the gas burns and turns to heat . I don't know what you do to vehicles, but I imagine it would be similar to propane cars. When we run out of oil there probably will be lots of methane burning going on . I don't know if that will be a good thing or not

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, the thing is, I guess we can make methane out of water, carbon and wind or solar power.
And we just happen to have a natural gas infrastructure, you know, lying around, whereas right now we don't have widespread battery storage capacity for electricity storage-which would represent the least energy lost in a storage medium.

Hydrogen, because it's the smallest atom-it leaks out of things. Making storage for it is actually a challenge.
Methane not so much.
Natural gas is mostly methane, according to the wikipedia page on it.

So while having batteries would be ideal, making methane out of excess electric and storing it for times when wind/solar aren't available might help.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Just to add a bit of info to this thread:

Wastewater treatment plants have been using methane (a natural product of bio-digestion) for *decades*. However until about 10-15 years ago, the greater amount was just used to heat the digestion tanks - that speeds up the digestion process *considerably*.

But nowadays, many of them have started to use it as fuel for their fleet of vehicles. It's happening in many states today and California alone has several dozen treatment plants using it that way.

Methane is hundreds of times easier to handle and safer than hydrogen. Many people are unaware of it but another bad attribute of hydrogen is that it causes metallic pipelines to become *very* brittle.

 

There's a burrito joke in there somewhere.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

why carbon ?

GreenNH3 is 50 cents a liter and zero emissions. It is used everyday. You can use the hydrogen to make NH3 rather than a carbon mix and save the pollution.

 

I think the collection hose would be a little uncomfortable.

 

That sounds really interesting! The only way I'm familiar with producing it involves a large amount of electricity. What is the process used in this case?

 

But can you run a car on it? If it provides heat-energy, it's back to the steam engine for us!

 

Ignore references to NH3. It is a scam.

 

I see a number of universities such as Iowa, michigan, Texas tech ect behind NH3.
can a scientist double check some numbers for me. We where looking at GreenGas.cc website. Re GreenNH3..
A company from india told us they could make a Norm or Stan cubic meter Hydrogen from water with an electolyser for 4.5 kwh of electric. If we take this new process of sunlight H, I will guess we can cut that in half? (suppose?). what amount of N and H does it take to combine and how much energy to combine the 3 parts H and 1 part N to make one liter NH3? In the lab we make N gas for 1 or 2 cents a liter using PSA

 

Jay Leno drives a stanley steamer and thinks he is green.
Meanwhile he is still spewing carbon worse than ever.
See GreenNH3 or GreenGas.cc for the best alternative.

 

NH3 is ammonia, and has a lot of problems with transportation and storage. It can be used as a hydrogen storage medium, but the machinery to do it is complex. Indeed, if we CAN make ammonia from solar or wind, we would be better served by using the ammonia to make fertilizer, then use the natural gas that _would_ have been used to make fertilizer and use it for fuel instead.

 

but what about when oil is gone and NG is 4 times the price or gone also.. or carbon becomes a problem??
from the GreenGas.cc website, they dont transport the GreenNH3 , they use it where they make it, so I dont see the problem there, as for use we have been using it safely on our farms for 50 years. The machine does not seem to be complex, a unit similar in size to a refrigerator making fuel 24/7/365. Seems like a good way to get away from exxon and BP.. can someone do the science math from my post 05/18/11 . I want to know if making GreenNH3 makes sense.

 

Oh! Then it's useless. You have to make hydrogen before you can make NH3 (ammonia) so if you're not transporting the resulting fuel, hydrogen is far, far easier to use.

The cycle is water + power = hydrogen + oxygen, then hydrogen + nitrogen = ammonia. So any "GreenNH3" machine has to make hydrogen anyway. If you already have hydrogen, just use it and don't worry about the complex step of turning it into ammonia.

 

phone up your insurer and tell them you are going to switch your car to hydrogen. They will give you my answer.

 

Try doing the same thing and telling them you are using pressurized anhydrous ammonia; they'll give you the same answer.

OTOH, tell them you're switching to methane, and they will reply something like
"oh, like the Civic GX uses? Yeah, we insure a bunch of people who drive GXes."

 

We don't need another hero. We need to use pig faeces like Tina Turner in mad Max.

 

JimW should be banned. All his posts are subtle cons, soliciting dollars for NH3 development. For example (From current web site):
“GreenNH3.com ( Green Gas ) needs one big investor, a group of investors, or a person to organize a group of investors to ramp up this project. If interested, please contact us.” About a year ago they were more specific by asking for $100 supporters.

Many dozens of Ph.D. chemist and millions of dollar spent over the last 100+ years have found the cheapest way to make NH3 mainly for agriculture use and it is by large scale, high pressure, hot industrial process with catalysts. Yes it can be used as a fuel for modified IC engines and that has been know for decades but it is not economical to do so.

JimW has had all these fact explained and documented but he is con man, interest in collecting funds from those who can be persuaded they are doing good for the environment by helping support new NH3 development project. I am moving one of those old explanatory posts here and asking it be deleted at original location to avoid double posting. Also see: http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2634222&postcount=80

He took in a Rogrer who commented “... If enough people had GreenGas.cc machines and played with them I am sure they would get more economic. ...” and following is my reply to Rogrer:

Why not ask him some simple questions like: At what pressure and temperature does the H2 and N2 combine to see if he is just blowing BS. I.e. check his answer against the unchangable Chemical characteristics of the reaction given in graph below:

"... In 1909 Fritz Haber established the conditions under which nitrogen, N2(g), and hydrogen, H2(g), would combine using

medium temperature (~500 C)
very high pressure (~250 atmospheres, ~25,500kPa)
a catalyst (a porous iron catalyst prepared by reducing magnetite, Fe3O4).
Osmium is a much better catalyst for the reaction but is very expensive.

This process produces an ammonia, NH3(g), yield of approximately 10-20%.

Here in graph form are the FUNDAMENTAL LAWS for this chemical reaction, which GreenNH3.com can not change:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

"... At 200 C and pressures above 750atm there is an almost 100% conversion of reactants to the ammonia product.
{When the equilibrium concentrations shown in the graph are finally reached - the reaction is slow at these lower temperatures.}

Since there are difficulties associated with containing larger amounts of materials at this high pressure, lower pressures of around 200 atm are used industrially.

By using a pressure of around 200atm and a temperature of about 500 C, the yield of ammonia is 10-20%, while costs and safety concerns in the building and during operation of the plant are minimised ..."

Quote from: http://www.ausetute.com.au/haberpro.html

Note also that the reaction is exothermic and also heat is also released when the gas produced NH3(g) is condensed to a liquid for storage. Furthermore, there is a lot of hot H2 & N2 remaining in the reactor that is mixed with the NH3 formed. As that NH3 is cooled to the liquid state heat is also removed as the N2 & H2 cools. To have any hope of being as economical as industrial scale production all this heat must be recovered - ideally in a counter flow heat exchanger to pre heat the incoming H2 & N2. Doing this in small "backyard scale" will make the NH3 produced several times more expensive than simply buying it.

Cease buying the "song and dance" from GreenNH3.com. They are either (1) well intentioned but very ignorant Or (2) a Scam trying to steal money from the well intentioned but very ignorant. And if you know anyone else who has been mislead, get the to read the facts here.