A feasibility study of implementing an Ammonia Economy

By J. Bartels. 2008

148 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This thesis reports the results of a feasibility study performed on the concept of an Ammonia Economy, which treats ammonia as an alternative fuel and energy storage mechanism. As part of the Ammonia Economy, costs for production, storage, and transportation of this alternative fuel are also presented. The cost of hydrogen, which is the main feedstock for ammonia production, was first determined for both fossil-fuel and alternative energy sources. Capital costs and operating parameters of an ammonia synthesis plant were then used in an economic model to calculate the cost of ammonia from energy sources that included natural gas, coal, nuclear, ocean thermal energy conversion (OTEC), wind, solar, and biomass. The energy use and cost for both hydrogen and ammonia fuels was then compared for fuel storage and transportation. The results showed that the lowest cost ammonia source is coal with a production cost of 147-432 $/t, or a gasoline equivalent of 0.96-2.83 $/gal. Natural gas and OTEC also provided low costs of less than 689 $/t, or a gasoline equivalent of 4.51 $/gal. Other alternative ammonia sources were more expensive, however, they may become economical as fossil fuel costs increase and technological advances improve the alternative fuel technology. The storage analysis of ammonia and hydrogen showed that the ammonia storage system is 93.6% efficient when the ammonia synthesis energy is included in the calculation, which was calculated by dividing the chemical energy stored by the chemical and electrical energy added to the storage vessel. In comparison, hydrogen is only 76.9% efficient. Ammonia also required nearly five times less energy for low temperature storage than hydrogen. In addition, ammonia has a storage cost advantage over hydrogen with an estimated cost for 182 days of storage to be 14.83 $/kg-H2 and 0.51 $/kg-H2, respectively. Comparing the transportation of the two fuels showed that ammonia is more efficient and less expensive than hydrogen to transport in a pipeline. Specifically, the efficiency for transporting the fuel 1,610 km and delivering it at fueling pressure is 93.4% and 86.9% for ammonia and hydrogen, respectively. The ammonia calculation also includes the losses

Subfields: Catalysis, Materials Chemistry

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e4a3c0ed04725a4222350f05b9d3a1fcc97f6329

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Catalysis

In Materials Chemistry

Citations in the corpus

Techno-economic analysis of ammonia production via integrated biomass gasification (2014, unknown): “Synthesis plant [18] TPD NH3 1800 323 0.”
Potential for hydrogen and Power-to-Liquid in a low-carbon EU energy system using cost optimization (2018, methodology): “Techno-economic data was taken from [149,150], electricity consumption for the combined process (NH3 conversion, compression and cooling plus ASU) is 0.”
Estimating long-term global supply costs for low-carbon hydrogen (2021, background): “conversion and reconversion processes; conversion requires 7-16% (Bartels, 2008) and reconversion requires about 16% (T-Raissi, 2002) of the energy contained in the hydrogen.”
Energy and Economic Costs of Chemical Storage (2020, methodology): “The estimations of the storage and transport costs are taken from several studies from the literature (Bartels, 2008; Rivarolo et al., 2014; Connolly et al., 2016; Jülch, 2016; Laborelec, 2016; Reuss et al., 2017).”
Assessing economically viable carbon reductions for the production of ammonia from biomass gasification (2014, background): “Bartels and Pate (2008) give US$498/t (approximately £250/t) for an 1800 tpd natural gas based plant and US$367/t (approximately £184/t) for an 1800 tpd coal based plant, both in 2007 and using the feedstock price at the time.”