Timeline for What are disadvantages of methane or ammonia compared to dihydrogen for metal ore reduction?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 24, 2023 at 3:56 | comment | added | tobalt | @ParaH2 The GWP is irrelevant because a) the substance would be cycled anyway. The only net emissions are water and CO2 (and N2). b) the question asks about the merit of these substances for the reaction itself. | |
| Jul 23, 2023 at 23:01 | comment | added | ParaH2 | I wouldn't use CH4 that has a GWP100 of 21-28 (various values found). I'd use NH3 that has a ODP of 0 and a GWP100 of 0 as well. | |
| Jul 20, 2023 at 18:54 | history | edited | tobalt | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 479 characters in body
|
| Jul 20, 2023 at 13:04 | answer | added | Stian | timeline score: 5 | |
| S Jul 20, 2023 at 12:21 | history | suggested | Rodrigo de Azevedo | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added tag. Minor improvements in wording and formatting. I am under the impression that formulas on titles are frowned upon
|
| Jul 20, 2023 at 11:13 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jul 20, 2023 at 12:21 | |||||
| Jul 20, 2023 at 9:56 | comment | added | tobalt | @BuckThorn I am not after things like storage or transportation in this chemistry question. It is really about trying to reduce a piece of metal ore with CH4 or NH3 as opposed to C or H2. Does that work worse, i.e. requires higher temps or is slower, i.e. ultimately less economical? | |
| Jul 20, 2023 at 9:36 | comment | added | Buck Thorn♦ | cen.acs.org/environment/green-chemistry/… // There might be advantages in terms of transportation of ammonia as opposed to H2. | |
| Jul 20, 2023 at 9:33 | comment | added | Buck Thorn♦ | Well, it would help to define "chemical disadvantage". Ultimately you might reduce this to a question of cost (capital), which might include environmental costs, or complexity, which might include factors such as safety, time to build a plant, practical limits to the scale of the process etc. | |
| Jul 20, 2023 at 9:10 | comment | added | tobalt | Aside from which chemical disadvantages? @BuckThorn Yes, using renewable energy surplus to form consumables endothermically is "expensive". The same applies to H2 formation, so this isnt really an arugment against CH4 or NH3 (unless of course the formation of the latter is much less efficient than H2 formation, which would alos be an answer btw). Using renewably generated fuel in cars is a rather nonsensical counter-argument because - indeed - much more efficient ways to propel cars from renewable energy do exist. | |
| Jul 20, 2023 at 7:45 | comment | added | Buck Thorn♦ | Aside from chemical disadvantages, using ammonia sounds like an energetically expensive solution, like using ethanol from corn as car fuel. | |
| Jul 20, 2023 at 7:06 | answer | added | Poutnik | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 20, 2023 at 6:35 | history | edited | tobalt | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Jul 20, 2023 at 6:32 | comment | added | tobalt | @Poutnik I am not solving any technological challenges but I am asking a simple chemistry question: "What are the disadvantages of CH4 and NH3 compared to H2 as a reducing agent in metal making?" If you feel deterred by the background I put in the question body, either ignore it or delete it, please. I edited the title to emphasize that question. | |
| Jul 20, 2023 at 6:04 | comment | added | Poutnik | Challenges of technology, where the solution is missing for decades, are very seldom solved by a single Q/A | |
| S Jul 20, 2023 at 5:19 | review | First questions | |||
| Jul 20, 2023 at 10:10 | |||||
| S Jul 20, 2023 at 5:19 | history | asked | tobalt | CC BY-SA 4.0 |