Видео

Hahaha ass cancer 40:46

Im 19 years old and Im not aloud to get a tattoo yet but Istg the first tattoo I’m gonna get ever is an open pair of scissors for Vendetta Red. ✂️🩸

One of my favorite interviews of all time.

Hey guys, thanks for having me!

Whats up with the music in the middle of him speaking

Is this actually new? I'm obsessed already just 5 minutes in. My ex talked me out of a Vendetta Red tattoo and I've regretted it ever since and have been thinking recently about going to get it.

I’ve listened to Tamm on C89.5 since 2002, the Naff days! He’s always been my favorite. Always plays the best trance songs.

Thanks for the tips regarding advertising e-commerce businesses versus service businesses. Great distinction!

Nice show

Very interesting, it’s difficult to listen to someone shouting at you for longer periods though.

Yet another amazing video to take my learning up into 7th gear, thanks Carl...and you huys at EGGs

So wich is the most efficient, easy and chep to crack the ammonia to produce hydrogen

Anyone who has used a cutting torch knows oxygen is necesary . HHO & lean burn diesel works .

Spot on. A Canadian fella years ago ran his car on straight ammonia he couldn’t find interest. Farmers inject ammonia into soil as fertilizer. Edison motors is proving a generator with an electric drive works for heavy hauling. Even with a diesel generator they calculate double the fuel mileage. Rock on keep up the good work

It's good if you show visual aides so we can see what you are talking about.

he's right, but the problem is making ammonia ("reverse cracking"), which is not easy to do with renewables.

Ammonia has some big challenges to overcome first, but it does hold great promise. Ammonia engine N2O tailpipe emissions as low as 20ppm are equivalent to a gasoline engine greenhouse gases from CO2. N2O is 300x worse of a greenhouse gas than CO2. That's just one issue. Ammonia is also a pretty dangerous chemical to human health, has a slow flame propagation and very high ignition temperature. It really isn't suited to cars but would be better in big marine applications.

The Devil is in the details. Right now the best way we have of getting ammonia in the quantities large enough to replace hydrocarbon fuels is the Haber-Bosch method, which is energy-intensive. In order to be useful in lowering our need for hydrocarbon fuels, new ways of generating ammonia will be needed. People are researching new methods, but it's a long way off.

This guy cant answer a straight question. "So the car you built starts with gasoline for a few seconds then burns ammonia?" then goes on a huge rant on his best idea for a powertrain. If you cant answer a simple question with a simple answer, there is some BS hiding in there somwhere. Thats is probably why the "Tech" never went anywhere. There were Red flags in all his facts starting with -500c to liquify hydrogen. Oh and 90-98% of the byproducts of a garbage dump is methane, not hydrogen.

Like locomotives. Toyota recently spoke of a ratio 1:6:30 meaning of every EV battery you could make 6 plug in hybrids or 30 regular hybrid

While it is technically possible to run an internal combustion engine on hydrogen or ammonia, it's a really bad idea. Using the difficult to store and expensive hydrogen fuel in an inherently inefficient internal combustion engine vehicle results in absurdly short driving ranges and insanely high fuel costs. Hydrogen fuel cell cars are more efficient so get reasonable ranges, but still have high fuel costs. The advantage of ammonia is it is much easier to store as it liquifies under pressure, so it can achieve reasonable driving ranges with IC engines. Leak detection is very easy due to its distinctive odor. Unfortunately, it's even more expensive than hydrogen as a fuel, and produces extremely high NOx emissions.

i still don’t understand 🏴‍☠️

'Promo SM'

Way dont yuzit laser plags for amonia

thanks Bassem, great insights

For Jorge Contreras how do you feel about Bitcoin/Crypto? Also would like to see you collaborate W/ Mr.Pineda

Great Questions! You guys asked much better questions than most pods. And really helpful answers.

This is not very clear of what or how this is going to be put together? Hydrogen system, ,with a combustion system, and with an ammonia system, a long with an electric system, in one vehicle? Sound like this is going to be very expensive. How about we just use nuclear to generate synthetic gas or diesel, made from co2 pulled from the air or other systems and run that in the vehicles with have currently no new vehicles.

One of the best interviews I've seen in a while!

Ammonia is a fine idea for storing energy from intermittent sources, but why develop an alternative to liquid hydrocarbons when there is no evidence CO2 warms the planet?

Yoo Idiots way yoo frget Indigo Hidrulick cars man get wan milon dolar wewrd end yoo damheds ignored this tenolge end not sey pipoll ey NH3 it is clen fyull end we can ran this car

Hydrogen is what piles up storage costs much more than ammonia storage. What about putting a second parallel pipeline to the ex-LNG/now-NH3 pipeline to deliver H2 separately as a gas, and then mix at the point of combustion just as you would an ammonia engine? Also, another good transporter that would also be a consumer is if the freight rails (+cargo ships) were willing to convert their engines to NH3-H2 internal combustion/compression. Those methods tend to be able to arrive at their delivery points on time and with much less legal resistance. Unfortunately, especially as of the recent railway drama, RR billionaires aren't known to be a compromising lot even when the deal hardly impacts the bottom line.

Why so complex? Just run the internal combustion engine on anhydrous ammonia. Current automobile engines programmed for ammonia run fine off it. They then emit no CO2 - ammonia engines emit water vapor and nitrogen gas. As in any ice small amounts of nitrogen oxides can be produced, which can be controlled in the same way as nitrogen oxides are now controlled. Why over complicate it? Over complicating a simple concept raises prices for the consumer and can reduce reliability. Over complexity can turn a winning idea into a loser. Mass production of ammonia is well understood and the needed H2 has been obtained by electrolysis commercially at a profit - the last ammonia plant that operated off hydro electricity closed just a few years ago. Ammonia is cheaper than gasoline. I think the real reason we have not started the process of transition to an ammonia economy (which would be the simplest, most workable transition of our transportation system) is that it is the quickest way to fix things and the most likely to work well. Oil is owned by influential people who are politically very powerful. These people want all that oil to be burned before any transition occurs, regardless of the consequences for everyone else - otherwise they lose a significant part of their wealth. This is why nothing truly useful at reducing our carbon emisions ever happens.

Why go to all that trouble, just build a GTL plant and make gasoline from captured CO2! Then use all the existing infrastructure….ammonia and hydrogen are both extremely dangerous chemicals!

wow

Hydrogen could be recovered on the fly just prior to the moment of combustion. Rather than having a metal tank to store the hydrogen,a plastic tank the size of 2 liters could store the hydrogen in a gaseous form. And then the hydrogen can just be burned off in a regular combustion engine. Moreover, since the byproduct of burning hydrogen is water it would become a great benefit to drought stricken areas such as Arizona and California. Because every car burning hydrogen will have water droplets coming out of the exhaust pipe. The sun will heat that up and creates clouds and then rain down on those drought stricken areas. The only problem is how does the government tax us by having cars burn hydrogen. Do you see the EV cars are taxed on the electricity put back into the batteries from EV charging stations. But by having a hydrogen powered car they’d have to tax water. And we could all get by that tax by just peeing into the fuel tank. So that problem has to be solved for the government to buy into the idea of having hydrogen powered cars. Personally I think if you own a hydrogen powered car then at the end of the year you would have to pay a fee on your taxes, so that money then goes towards road maintenance and such.

Just have a think. You say Extinction rebellion does good work. You say the sun has only a small effect on climate. ***You must think we are stupid***. Shame on you for taking Money to lie to the people. 😂😂😂😂

Video is just a kind of teaser, without actual comparison. Shame.

so anhydrous Ammonia is corrosive and reading I've done on it that when comes to storage containers can go two ways: 1) Use stainless steel - the more expensive option, or 2) Use cheaper carbon steel but inject about 1% water, which acts to inhibit the corrosive action against the carbon steel. So to put a finer point on what this video is suggesting - using existing natural gas pipelines to transport Ammonia, looks like would likewise need to be mixing water to 1% to inhibit the corrosion of the pipe. Now the reading I was doing was on stationary storage tanks so hopefully the same guidance would apply to pipeline gransport. One tends to think that maybe this corrosion inhibiting is not 100% perfect and that over time there still might be some corrosion of the pipeline - anybody with expertise on this, please chime in. One thing too is do not use propane fittings with anything containing anhydrous Ammonia as Ammonia is very reactive with copper so it would corrode brass propane fittings. And the fumes are toxic so avoid inhalation of any plume arising from an anhydrous Ammonia leak or rupture - run the hell away before is too late. Because it is liquified under pressure it boils under 1 atmosphere and ambiant temperatures. The fumes are fairly dense and do not dissipate upward quickly like Hydrogen gas. So Ammonia leaks can form clouds that can easily over come people and kill them.

I think what you have here is the prescription for hybrid 18-wheelers for long haul applications. You could also combine this tech with the direct ammonia to hydrogen for fuel cells tech to give your 18 wheeler its own charge station while the driver sleeps his mandated hours.

You're still stuck in the beautiful Neanderthal days hahaha we don't need to burn fossil fuels. We only need Superfluids. That last forever. Hot or cold. That's all I'm going to say.

The music is super quiet. We'll find another solution in the future. :) In the meantime, check out Mø at: momomoyouth.com

Where do you get your ammonia? Just a humble question?

I dunno, compressed hydrogen works. Not to mention that you could setup a heat exchanger at points exiting the fuel tanks where the pressure decreases to take advantage of the cooling effect to essentially have "free cooling" for the HVAC system. It would be the polar opposite to a combustion vehicle where there is waste heat on tap (assuming you are running a fuel cell). So while there would be losses compressing the gas, some of that energy could be harnessed again as the hydrogen decompresses. If we had a hydrogen combustion engine, this would mean that you would have no need for seperate heating and cooling systems, just heat exchangers. Waste engine heat for winter, waste cooling for summer. Heating and cooling on tap where it is required with relative simplicity. No more AC compressors or resistive heaters, etc. You could use the cold from the tanks to help cool the engine potentially which could reduce the size of the radiator and allow for increased aerodynamic efficiency. This could yield greater fuel efficiency which would alleviate the need for massive fuel tanks. The main issue I see with fuel cells is their need for advanced air filtration to prevent fuel cell fouling. A combustion engine is much less sensitive to dust and dirt. There is a Chinese built hydrogen combustion hybrid engine that was developed that has some impressive specifications and sounds like it is almost exactly like a Toyota Prius in how it functions. Add some of these heating/cooling subsystems I have suggested and you can further increase efficiency. And for those concerned about the dangers of hydrogen, I would suggest you take time to reflect on the dangers of gasoline. A leak in a gasoline tank will result in pooling fuel which is extremely dangerous. A leak in a hydrogen tank will result in the hydrogen almost immediately dissipating upward (remember it is the lightest element and extremely bouyant). So I would argue the hydrogen is much safer than gasoline and potentially even safer than a BEV with a compromised battery.

Do I have a Bridge to sell you folks! Only 1 million dollars and I'll send you the Bill of sale.

Yes, you can burn it but it is still not efficient! This bloke is full of sh*t! You are just against EVs!! F%$kwits! It will only be worth it in Ships and Huge Mining equipment etc. Thermal dynamics d%ckheads!

This did not answer the question of comparing overall efficiency and cost between the two. One point is the NoX produced in the ICE is very low if the hydrogen air ratio is at an optimum level.

But what's the efficiency of the fuel cell?

Ammonia power people!!!

Ugh, doesn't locomotives run that way??