EVs are not selling well. Dealers are upset

[Blues Man]

A 100% non-ICE society is.

I doubt that.

Toyota is working on an ICE that runs on ammonia which actually a zero carbon fuel and is far more practical than EVs and since we already have the industrial manufacture of NH3 up and running it will be significantly less expensive since we can simply modify existing infrastructure rather than installing an entire new system.

Not to mention the fact that we won't be able to source enough nickel, cobalt and other rare earths to have every car in the country be an EV

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I doubt that.

Toyota is working on an ICE that runs on ammonia which actually a zero carbon fuel and is far more practical than EVs and since we already have the industrial manufacture of NH3 up and running it will be significantly less expensive since we can simply modify existing infrastructure rather than installing an entire new system.

Not to mention the fact that we won't be able to source enough nickel, cobalt and other rare earths to have every car in the country be an EV

Toyota is working on an ICE that runs on ammonia which actually a zero carbon fuel

How much of the current ammonia production is zero carbon?

Why would we waste energy and money to make ammonia?

Unless you have a secret, cheap source of ready-made ammonia?

 

[Crick]

I doubt that.

Toyota is working on an ICE that runs on ammonia which actually a zero carbon fuel and is far more practical than EVs and since we already have the industrial manufacture of NH3 up and running it will be significantly less expensive since we can simply modify existing infrastructure rather than installing an entire new system.

Not to mention the fact that we won't be able to source enough nickel, cobalt and other rare earths to have every car in the country be an EV

Ammonia is far more toxic than gasoline and extremely difficult to handle safely. Have you ever gotten household ammonia on your hands? Notice how it feels slippery? Do you know why? It's caustic and is dissolving your flesh. And household ammonia is a 5% solution. Imagine what a 100% solution will do when you splash it on your leg out of a gas pump. It also has roughly half the energy density of gasoline and will end up producing large amounts of nitrogen. The engines developed by GAC, aided by Toyota, are not zero carbon. They produce 90% less carbon than a similarly power ICE engine, but not zero.

https://www.carscoops.com/2023/07/gac-and-toyota-have-created-an-ammonia-powered-2-0-liter-engine/

 

[Blues Man]

Toyota is working on an ICE that runs on ammonia which actually a zero carbon fuel

How much of the current ammonia production is zero carbon?

Why would we waste energy and money to make ammonia?

Unless you have a secret, cheap source of ready-made ammonia?

We already have industrial ammonia manufacturing. In fact worldwide almost 200 million metric tons of ammonia is produced annually.

And passenger cars alone produce 60% of CO2 emissions Ammonia production world wide produce 1%

even if you increased ammonia production, replacing fossil fuel engines with ammonia burning engines would result in a huge net decease of CO2 emissions

Current more energy friendly production methods for ammonia are being researched as well.

 

[Blues Man]

Ammonia is far more toxic than gasoline and extremely difficult to handle safely. Have you ever gotten household ammonia on your hands? Notice how it feels slippery? Do you know why? It's caustic and is dissolving your flesh. And household ammonia is a 5% solution. Imagine what a 100% solution will do when you splash it on your leg out of a gas pump. It also has roughly half the energy density of gasoline and will end up producing large amounts of nitrogen. The engines developed by GAC, aided by Toyota, are not zero carbon. They produce 90% less carbon than a similarly power ICE engine, but not zero.

https://www.carscoops.com/2023/07/gac-and-toyota-have-created-an-ammonia-powered-2-0-liter-engine/

And people used to think cars that ran on gasoline would be bowing up every day. And we already have catalytic converters in cars to take care of nitric oxide emissions

nothing results in zero carbon emissions. Not even electric cars. The perfect is the enemy of the good

Replacing all cars with EVs is not feasible. We cannot source all the nickel, cobalt and other rare earths involved in making them and those elements are not renewable not to mention the ecological and human nightmare the mining of those elements entail.

 

[ding]

I would have a hard time buying an EV. Not because I can't afford one. Not because I couldn't set up a charging station at home. Not because it wouldn't be cool to have instantaneous torque. But because they have a very limited niche that is already being served effectively by ICE. So I can't find a good reason to own one.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We already have industrial ammonia manufacturing. In fact worldwide almost 200 million metric tons of ammonia is produced annually.

And passenger cars alone produce 60% of CO2 emissions Ammonia production world wide produce 1%

even if you increased ammonia production, replacing fossil fuel engines with ammonia burning engines would result in a huge net decease of CO2 emissions

Current more energy friendly production methods for ammonia are being researched as well.

Why would we waste energy and money to make ammonia?

You realize what the feed chemicals are, don't you?

even if you increased ammonia production, replacing fossil fuel engines with ammonia burning engines would result in a huge net decease of CO2 emissions

Show your math.

 

[hadit]

EVs are still in their infantsy. Of course there are and will be problems to work out. Nobody expects them to be completely worked out right now.

Which is why it's way too early for the government (states at this point) to mandate them.

 

[Blues Man]

Why would we waste energy and money to make ammonia?

You realize what the feed chemicals are, don't you?

even if you increased ammonia production, replacing fossil fuel engines with ammonia burning engines would result in a huge net decease of CO2 emissions

Show your math.

Why waste money mining nickel cobalt and rare earth minerals that are finite in supply?

Think about it

passenger cars are responsible for more than 60% of all GHG emissions. We have a literally unlimited supply of nitrogen and hydrogen

A car running on NH3 produces zero carbon emissions

We would have to increase world production of NH3 over 60 times to have NH3 production produce the same CO2 emissions as passenger vehicles. And there are new processes to manufacture NH3 that will require less energy and that will ultimately lower the ghg emissions of manufacturing

 

[Crick]

Why waste money mining nickel cobalt and rare earth minerals that are finite in supply?

Think about it

passenger cars are responsible for more than 60% of all GHG emissions. We have a literally unlimited supply of nitrogen and hydrogen

A car running on NH3 produces zero carbon emissions

We would have to increase world production of NH3 over 60 times to have NH3 production produce the same CO2 emissions as passenger vehicles. And there are new processes to manufacture NH3 that will require less energy and that will ultimately lower the ghg emissions of manufacturing

How does that beat producing hydrogen with non-emitting technologies? You still have the problem that ammonia is really dangerous and difficult stuff to handle. It makes gasoline look like bath soap.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why waste money mining nickel cobalt and rare earth minerals that are finite in supply?

Think about it

passenger cars are responsible for more than 60% of all GHG emissions. We have a literally unlimited supply of nitrogen and hydrogen

A car running on NH3 produces zero carbon emissions

We would have to increase world production of NH3 over 60 times to have NH3 production produce the same CO2 emissions as passenger vehicles. And there are new processes to manufacture NH3 that will require less energy and that will ultimately lower the ghg emissions of manufacturing

passenger cars are responsible for more than 60% of all GHG emissions.

You have any backup for this claim?

We have a literally unlimited supply of nitrogen and hydrogen

And very little of it is in the form of NH3. Hydrogen in water isn't
a source of useful energy. Nitrogen in the atmosphere isn't
a source of useful energy.

A car running on NH3 produces zero carbon emissions

Do you understand the chemicals involved in making NH3?

 

[ding]

How does that beat producing hydrogen with non-emitting technologies? You still have the problem that ammonia is really dangerous and difficult stuff to handle. It makes gasoline look like bath soap.

Can you walk me through the commerciality of producing hydrogen with non-emitting technologies?

 

[ding]

Hydrogen in water isn't
a source of useful energy.

Apparently crick believes it is as long as non-emitting technologies are used.

 

[Crick]

Why waste money mining nickel cobalt and rare earth minerals that are finite in supply?

Petroleum is also finite in supply.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Apparently crick believes it is as long as non-emitting technologies are used.

Blues Man is much more confused than Crick.

 

[ding]

Blues Man is much more confused than Crick.

NH3 seems to be an even bigger reach than hydrogen, so sure. But I'm not sure crick understands how hydrogen is commercially produced though because he glosses over that point with his vague non-emitting technology comment.

 

[Blues Man]

How does that beat producing hydrogen with non-emitting technologies? You still have the problem that ammonia is really dangerous and difficult stuff to handle. It makes gasoline look like bath soap.

And everyone was afraid of gasoline before it became commonplace.

So you have to touch gasoline when you fill your tank?

 

[Blues Man]

Petroleum is also finite in supply.

Which is why we need an alternative.

DUH

 

[ding]

Petroleum is also finite in supply.

Have you ever bothered to find out how finite it is? Oil and gas. Especially gas.

 

[ding]

Arguing to not use massive reserves of easy to use and portable energy in a world that needs energy doesn't make sense.