Skip to main content

Ammonia as fertilizer or as fuel?

 


Ammonia is "having a moment" as a possible alternative fuel.

Hydrogen had a moment a while back, but it has faded, and now ... the green-hype machine has turned to ammonia. 

It is possible to burn ammonia, and to do work thereby.  Further, ammonia is a molecule with no carbon atom, so a machine that burns ammonia won't be emitting any carbon dioxide. 

One big problem though, is this: ammonia is also a critical fertilizer. As in ... ammonia is poured onto the soil to help produce our food supply. Is it really a good idea to create a new use for ammonia, one that we are to regard as critical to saving the planet, that will compete with the fertilizer use?  thereby driving up the price of ... food?

I am reminded of the days, now long ago, when biofuels were having a moment.  This amounted to using corn to make booze and then mixing the booze with gasoline, as a gas-extender.  That still happens as it was entered into law, BUT nobody any longer thinks of it as a world saver.  The practice has increased the demand for corn, having at least a marginal effect of raising the global prices of what is for many a dietary staple. 

Could we reduce carbon emissions by doing more of that?  Yes: we could also increase the rate of deaths by starvation in the process.

Now it is ammonia.  The difference is that diverting ammonia from fertilizer to fuel threatens not the supply of one specific food, but the supply of virtually everything deliberately grown. Ammonia by itself can serve as a fertilizer, or it can serve as a component in chemically more complicated fertilizers such as ammonium nitrate. 

My suspicion is that ammonia's moment as an energy source will not last long. 

I certainly hope, for the sake of our species, that a transition to a low-or-no emissions system of transportation is underway.  But we ought to have some skepticism about the green-hype machine.

In due course, my best guess is that the next dominant system will involve electric cars, an improved battery tech to run them efficiently, and a centralized grid that may be run on fusion reactors to recharge the batteries.

Labels:

Comments

  1. Paul D. Van PeltMay 11, 2025 at 5:18 PM

    Interesting information. I knew ammonia can be a component of powerful explosives. Anyone remembering Oklahoma remembers that, I think. Not being a chemist, I don't know what formulation would work in what sort of internal combustion engine if, and only if, we are still talking about such forces of locomotion. So, I can't know. And, can't know environmental impact of ammonia-based fuel(s). I suppose that will be examined, eh, ?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
24 comments
Read more

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
10 comments
Read more

The Growing Block Theory of Time

My own disposition, in regard to the philosophy of time, is toward the "growing block" theory. This is the view that past events remain realities, that present-moment events are also realities, but that future events are not yet real. The image is of the universe as a block with an edge on (say) the right-hand side. The block is expanding because that edge is moving ever further right, and that edge is what we call the present, or, simply, "now." Everything to the left of that edge is both static (the past is complete) and, still and forever, real. Think of the phrase "the moving finger writes." The chief alternatives to the growing-block theory are "presentism" (only the now-edge itself is real) and "eternalism" (past, present, and future are all real." I believe that time is a growing block because (1) that's what it feels like, (2) we should stick with the introspective phenomenon unless we have good reason to abandon ...
8 comments
Read more