• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

Ammonia fueled Ranger project is now on the road


WildSide

New Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
162
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Transmission
Automatic
There is a solution available right now and I am using it although controversial the gas has been produced and in use by industry for years and remains to be the best viable solution to date towards a feasible automotive ‘hydrogen’ system. The conversion costs are in line with propane/CNG systems and Infrastructure studies have been completed showing that NH3 could be the first logical step towards the so called hydrogen economy.
The gas is anhydrous ammonia, this high octane fuel produces zero CO2 tailpipe emissions and sufficient fuel can be stored on board without expensive high pressure tanks as compared to pure hydrogen. There are special concerns however being that NH3 is hazardous in its stored form.

While I am not going to go into specific technical details on special tank design or details on engine modifications that I am using I will welcome questions and disregard non believers.

The research vehicle is a 1999 Ranger with a modified 4.0
 


gotmudd

New Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
618
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
PORT ANGELES, WA
Vehicle Year
1973
Make / Model
FORD
Engine Size
390C.I
Transmission
Automatic
don't come into my neighborhood, if the dope heads find out that you're running anhydrous ammonia, they'll steal your fuel, tank and all:annoyed:[ it's the main ingredient in "crank"]
 

reno

New Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2008
Messages
641
Reaction score
1
Points
0
There will be those that will say this the most dangerous thing in the world, and will not speak of the harmful effects of gasoline. I responded to the "intellectual" HHO sticky here about some of this here. I would like to here more from this conversion, how long has this study been going on? I am all for a different fuel other than fossil. And a fuel we can produce ourselves if we want versus big oil or any other big corp controlling the market producing it and controlling any price they want to charge, brag about major record breaking profits every month, all the while claiming supply and demand has raised prices is far better.

Another infamous the government does not lie to you scenario, how do you make a record profit, when the cost is so far greater and the supply is far less than the demand? Please share this info, there are those of us that are willing see something new at work and the trial and errors before saying it does not work, it is not worth it. Look at some old footage of when the car was first invented, people laughed that it would replace the horse, then along it came, you had a hard time starting the engine, then the steering was not all that great, then people were being hit by the automotive, then gas was not readily available, then auto wrecks and just keeps going all the way until now. It takes progress and time and intuitive thinking of minds experimenting to make something better than what it currently is.
 

MAKG

New Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,634
Reaction score
19
Points
0
Location
California central coast
Vehicle Year
1991
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0L
Transmission
Manual
It may make zero CO2 emissions, but it sure as heck is going to make a HELL of a lot of NOx. Or where did you think all that nitrogen went?

CO2 isn't the only pollutant nor the only greenhouse gas. And CO2 dissolved in water (such as in rain clouds) makes weak acid. Some NOxs make NASTY strong acids.
 

AllanD

TRS Technical Staff
TRS Technical Advisor
Joined
Jun 1, 2001
Messages
7,897
Reaction score
134
Points
63
Age
62
Location
East-Central Pennsylvania
Vehicle Year
1987... sorta
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
'93 4.0
Transmission
Manual
Not to mention that Ammonia must be "made" the same way Hydrogen must be.
Unless you own an enormous fish farm and are seperating the ammonia out of
the water?

Ammonia simply side-steps SOME of the storage issues of Hydrogen.
(and replaces it with others, Ammonia agressively attacks some metals,
notable copper and nickel)

It's ALL about getting MORE hydrogen in a smaller space without
using cryogenic storage (LH2 or Methane)

Frankly I think Hydrazine shows more promise as a Hydrogen storage means,
but Hydrazine also has serious "issues" (like it's toxic as hell)

Hydrogen in all it's varied forms is NOT a source of energy, it is a means
of energy STORAGE.

I still believe that the BEST replacement for gasoline as a personal vehicle
fuel is Butyl Alcohol (Butanol) as it offes a similar energy density to gasoline
(Range) a higher "octane" AND it can be produced cheaply from NON-edible
biomass and even agricultural byproducts.
the STALKS from corn produce MORE butanol per ton than the GRAIN of corn can produce ethanol. and people (and cattle) still get to eat the corn!
 

inferno94

New Member
Joined
May 2, 2008
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Vehicle Year
2007
Make / Model
Mazda
Transmission
Manual
Hydrogen in all it's varied forms is NOT a source of energy, it is a means of energy STORAGE.

I still believe that the BEST replacement for gasoline as a personal vehicle
fuel is Butyl Alcohol (Butanol) as it offes a similar energy density to gasoline
(Range) a higher "octane" AND it can be produced cheaply from NON-edible
biomass and even agricultural byproducts.
the STALKS from corn produce MORE butanol per ton than the GRAIN of corn can produce ethanol. and people (and cattle) still get to eat the corn!
Gasoline is also a means of energy storage (any chemical fuel is) it's just that it was stored by the plants and animals that it came from long ago.

Alcohols would be another relatively cheap fuel for combustion type engines and can be produced now. I don't believe that if alcohols are adopted as our main fuel (as gasoline/diesel now are) that they would be a transitional thing. Industry and people wouldn't want to change over from combustion powered vehicles, so as you said it would be a replacement.

This would not really be in the long term interests of humanity as I see it. Issues with exhaust emissions, though different, would still exist. We would still be running complex mechanical engines that wouldn't capture even 40% of the energy they are consuming.

I congratulate the OP on his efforts to modify an existing vehicle into a less polluting one that runs on a sustainable fuel source. I do believe however that a switch to producing vehicles of that nature is not the best course of action. I believe that electric drive train vehicles are the way to go due to; simplicity, few parts to wear, better torque curve than combustion engines, and overall greater efficiency of energy transfer from fuel to the wheels.

This is not to say we don't have an energy storage (battery, fuel cell etc) problem to solve but isn't that the problem we are trying to solve with our current mechanically powered vehicles? Were running out or oil to make gas so what do we replace it with? How about taking this opportunity to upgrade to an entirely better drive system?

To sum up Yay Electric vehicles!:shout:
 

reno

New Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2008
Messages
641
Reaction score
1
Points
0
With the naysayers disagreeing because of greenhouse gasses and such, I sure as hell hope you ride a bicycle, have no electricity, use no chemical what so ever, read no newspapers or write letters and so on....this can go on forever. Every Alternative fuel source you such down and dont want it, but you have all the luxuries that are currently causing these, so before you state you are trying to get a non green house effect fuel in motion and to keep going on the same path, shut your mouth, get out the blackboard and start inventing a alternative fuel source and help out instead of belly aching and crying the blues all the time. It is those of you that are the problem and not part of the solution. Open your mind to this, there is an Alternative fuel source, just has to be found and manipulated.
 

MAKG

New Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,634
Reaction score
19
Points
0
Location
California central coast
Vehicle Year
1991
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0L
Transmission
Manual
No, it's not every alternative. Just every harebrained scam.

There are a few alternatives that look promising, but you haven't latched onto any of them.
 

reno

New Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2008
Messages
641
Reaction score
1
Points
0
No, it's not every alternative. Just every harebrained scam.

There are a few alternatives that look promising, but you haven't latched onto any of them.
And you have not lived up to your title here by introducing them.....
 

Bent Bolt

Active Member
Ford Technician
Solid Axle Swap
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
1,433
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Age
54
Location
Edmonton,AB
Vehicle Year
1999
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
Supercharged 4.0 SOHC
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
Solid Axle Swap 4x4
There are a few alternatives that look promising, but you haven't latched onto any of them.
I'm curious , what would those alternatives be ??

I agree with Inferno on electric vehicles. The only real problem with them is the fact that current ( get it ?? Current ?? LOL , bad pun ) battery technology is far behind that of the vehicle.
 

MAKG

New Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,634
Reaction score
19
Points
0
Location
California central coast
Vehicle Year
1991
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
4.0L
Transmission
Manual
I'm curious , what would those alternatives be ??
The really good ones are all centered around electric vehicles. Hydrogen fuel cells, improving batteries, etc. Basically, moving the generation step OFF the vehicle. Except perhaps for a correct hybrid (the current ones are bass-ackwards and FAR too complex). I.e., two or four electric motors at the wheels, and an engine acting as a generator. No differentials, transmissions, or driveshafts. And you can tune the engine for a specific RPM, which gives a lot of room for improvement since you don't care anymore that the powerband would be really peaky.

The current crop of hybrids get most (not all) of their benefit from making the vehicles very light. This is a really obvious dead end.

As for an improved fuel, if you want it to work as well or better than gasoline and still burn it, for the most part, you need to make it heavier. Like, Diesel. Rocket fuels (e.g., hydrazine or hydrogen peroxide) are VERY BAD to put in a car; they are extremely dangerous as they can burn even in an airtight tank!
 
Last edited:

AllanD

TRS Technical Staff
TRS Technical Advisor
Joined
Jun 1, 2001
Messages
7,897
Reaction score
134
Points
63
Age
62
Location
East-Central Pennsylvania
Vehicle Year
1987... sorta
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
'93 4.0
Transmission
Manual
Gasoline is also a means of energy storage (any chemical fuel is) it's just that it was stored by the plants and animals that it came from long ago.

Alcohols would be another relatively cheap fuel for combustion type engines and can be produced now. I don't believe that if alcohols are adopted as our main fuel (as gasoline/diesel now are) that they would be a transitional thing. Industry and people wouldn't want to change over from combustion powered vehicles, so as you said it would be a replacement.

This would not really be in the long term interests of humanity as I see it. Issues with exhaust emissions, though different, would still exist. We would still be running complex mechanical engines that wouldn't capture even 40% of the energy they are consuming.

I congratulate the OP on his efforts to modify an existing vehicle into a less polluting one that runs on a sustainable fuel source. I do believe however that a switch to producing vehicles of that nature is not the best course of action. I believe that electric drive train vehicles are the way to go due to; simplicity, few parts to wear, better torque curve than combustion engines, and overall greater efficiency of energy transfer from fuel to the wheels.

This is not to say we don't have an energy storage (battery, fuel cell etc) problem to solve but isn't that the problem we are trying to solve with our current mechanically powered vehicles? Were running out or oil to make gas so what do we replace it with? How about taking this opportunity to upgrade to an entirely better drive system?

To sum up Yay Electric vehicles!:shout:
Yes, but the oil was made and the hydrogen stored in it long ago.
I don't see ammonia, alcohol or hydrazine being pumped out of any holes drilled in the ground, it all must be MADE, in geological terms it must be
made immediate to it's use

Electric vehicles? Great, IN USE no pollution from the vehicle.
But that ignores that most electricity is produced by burning coal and much of the rest by burning Oil, Natural gas or Uranium thus there is "hidden" pollution and energy use, it isn't free and it MUST come from somewhere.

wind generation? Gotta deal with the NIMBY's
GREENPEACE picketed the site of a proposed windfarm in rural vermont.
a friend in vermont was denied a permit to put up a wind generator
sued the township to get the permit anyway and was promptly sued by a local environmental group... does this make sense?
Solar power? still gotta deal with the NIMBY's
Commercial Geothermal? Try drilling a deep hole and see how quickly greenpease is on your ass!
Nuclear? Don't even ask (NIMBY/Greenpeace/Obama and anyone else who isn't busy)

And that also doesn't adress the limited range of electric cars.
and that related ENTIRELY to energy density.

that is a hurdle that will likely NEVER be overcome.
(unless you STEAL the hydrogen from the Bearded Spock
alternate universe and store it in another (unocupied) alternate universe)
and "burning" the fuel in a fuel cell is STILL burning it

LONG RANGE transportation will required liquid fuels The fact that
hasn't been grasped as reality by many here is only proof that you
just don't understand how dense an enegy storage media liquid
fuels are.

REAL Mass transit would solve much of the problem
However other associate issues with those make them problematic.

the infrastructure cost of extending mass transit lines makes them cost prohibitive (essentially not gonna happen) Add to that Most mass transit systems are near useless unless you are moving "radially" to or from the "hub" of the urban center.
There are no meaningful concentric lines to complete the "web"
(you can add here "Ain't gonna get fixed either")

so if you need to move across the circle the only way to do it
is travel to the core then back out.

Most people don't want to spend two HOURS commuting 10 miles because the cross connections don't exsist.... "becase they aren't economically viable"

Electric vehicles are "toys", playthings for those amused by such.
The lack of basic understanding about how people actually move outside of an urban area and how vehicles are actually used outside of a dense suburban area makes me kinda grim about the future possibilities bycause I KNOW in both my head and my heart that the engineers and those paying them simply don't get it.... and I doubt to the core of my soul that they ever will.

That and the general lack of understanding about energy density....

Frankly there is no getting away from liquid fuels and any and all methods to do so are doomed to failure by simple reality.

If you don't understand that then there is no hope for you.

A Prius is "great" for driving from your suburban home
to the "Park & Ride" at the commuter train station.
Getting in one for a long highway trip? demonstration of stupidity.

The simplest fact is that pure electric vehicles are great for
City dwellers and mabey 1/3 of suburbanites.
PURE electric vehicles are utterly useless for the vast
majority of people that live in Sub-Rural and true rural areas
with the marginal exception of retired people who only
need to mae a twice weekly run for groceries and the
pharmacy and to church on sunday.

I'm gonna say it again to hammer it home, it's all about
energy density and other than liquid fuels of one form or
another, nothing else will do what needs to be done.

RENEWABLE liquid fuels ARE the future.

If you GAVE me an electric car I couldn't really use it....
it doesn't do what I (or the majority of others) NEED to do.

What I WANT to do is a FAR higher standard.

AD
 

inferno94

New Member
Joined
May 2, 2008
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Vehicle Year
2007
Make / Model
Mazda
Transmission
Manual
Maybe I come into this with a different mindset given I live in Ontario the most nuclear energy friendly place on earth, we also like our wind and hydro electric generators here. So given that I come from a place where most energy is generated through renewable and nuclear sources, I may not be considering the situations surrounding energy generating methods employed elsewhere. It sounds like some of your special interest groups have some screws loose, glad we don't seem to have so many of them.

I do recognize that the current crop of batteries don't meet everyone's range needs. They are something that is developing rapidly but currently meet the needs of most commuters. Electric vehicles like the Tesla roadster CAN travel 200+miles on a charge that costs $4-6 TODAY, think about what their capabilities could be in 20 years. Granted they are expensive now but so were microwaves and computers when they were first coming out (yes I know electric cars predate gas ones).

Propane is world wide becoming the next big thing in fuel, you just need a little bigger engine or a turbo to get the same power as a gas engine. Evidence can be found in places like India and Australia where new cars are offered in a gas or propane configuration. Propane is stored in liquid form therefore the density you were looking for. It could still be an available thing for those who need range and quick fueling while producing relatively harmless exhaust. The best part is, though not optimal, current gas fueled vehicles can be made to run on propane (or other combustible gasses).

Combustible gasses like methane can be generated by garbage fueled devices called methane digesters. When Toronto had a decision about what to do with it's garbage they were one solution but considered too expensive. If an energy company built some was paid by cities to take their garbage then sells the garbage gasses back as fuel that seems economically viable to me.

Though the idea that long range transport requires liquid fuel is really referring to refueling times (if you had to refuel 2x as often but it cut your fuel bill by 95% I would still be happy with it). You are assuming there will be no such thing as a quick charging battery. 10 yrs ago a cordless drill took 8hrs to charge and could drive 3-4 screws with that charge, now it takes 1 hr (for some) and can work for hours.

I agree that transit systems are inadequate, European transit is wonderful many go a lifetime without driving and are not inconvenienced by it. Maybe we should try modeling their transit systems?

I don't see the point in current hybrids myself and make no argument for them other than to say, many trains are diesel electric hybrids and have been so for some time.

Current gasoline engines are far from their potential efficiency as is being shown with some "new ideas". Everyone blames stoplight idling as a waste of fuel, Mazda has developed a system by which the cars engine shuts off as you stop and restarts immediately when throttle is applied. This system does not use the starter to restart and saves 8% on the average fuel bill. There are many "new" ideas like this coming out now to save gas and prolong the use of oil based fuel.

The ideal vehicle I could envision would be electrically powered with main power coming from batteries with a normal 500-700km range backed up by a methane powered turbine generator.
 

reno

New Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2008
Messages
641
Reaction score
1
Points
0
The really good ones are all centered around electric vehicles. Hydrogen fuel cells, improving batteries, etc. Basically, moving the generation step OFF the vehicle. Except perhaps for a correct hybrid (the current ones are bass-ackwards and FAR too complex). I.e., two or four electric motors at the wheels, and an engine acting as a generator. No differentials, transmissions, or driveshafts. And you can tune the engine for a specific RPM, which gives a lot of room for improvement since you don't care anymore that the powerband would be really peaky.

The current crop of hybrids get most (not all) of their benefit from making the vehicles very light. This is a really obvious dead end.

As for an improved fuel, if you want it to work as well or better than gasoline and still burn it, for the most part, you need to make it heavier. Like, Diesel. Rocket fuels (e.g., hydrazine or hydrogen peroxide) are VERY BAD to put in a car; they are extremely dangerous as they can burn even in an airtight tank!

But you are saying all these are wrong to use as well. Where are the good Alternatives that we have not yet latched onto? Remember, we are looking at experiments here that we want to try or see what results come from a few that do try.
 

reno

New Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2008
Messages
641
Reaction score
1
Points
0
I forgot to put this in my last post. If power consumption is the problem with HHO, why would a Audio amp Capacitor not work? It stablizes a 1000W + amp and that is FAR more than the upto 30 amps HHO pulls? I mean if we were able to have power delivered that is stored, and uses very little power from the battery and charging system, then why not on any thing else? AllanD used a Capacitor to help with power to a transmitter and he had 4 heavy Duty Batteries and a 150amp alternator and stated that the Cap helped tremendously. So why not?
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Staff online

Member & Vendor Upgrades

For a small yearly donation, you can support this forum and receive a 'Supporting Member' banner, or become a 'Supporting Vendor' and promote your products here. Click the banner to find out how.

Truck of The Month


Kirby N.
March Truck of The Month

Recently Featured

Want to see your truck here? Share your photos and details in the forum.

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Events

25th Anniversary Sponsors

Check Out The TRS Store


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad


Amazon Deals

Top