4 ms·

The article you mention has no discussion of ammonia, just hydrogen and LOHC. That plus your mention of shipping energy into Canberra makes me wonder if we're a

• brownbat 6y ago
  Since ammonia and LOHCs face some overlapping constraints I don't expect an order of magnitude difference in cost. But you're right, it would have been more useful with an explicit comparison. If you are seeing stuff that suggests ammonia will get very close to parity with oil, that's really fascinating, I hope it pans out that way. The IAE is more optimistic than I am about ammonia transport, while still listing some significant hurdles: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360319919302769 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036031991... I think it's a good report, and you could read it to be more convinced of either of our positions. Sorry we're talking past each other. You did actually change my mind a bit, if it's any consolation. Agree it's too hasty to say electrons are always better than atoms, though I'm still optimistic about more supergrids. My main remaining concern is just that, as you change your power mix away from oil to generate more ammonia, or electrolytic hydrogen, or whatever, the case for shipping fuel erodes significantly, because you can just move generation closer instead. Sorry we couldn't get to ground on this one. Thanks for your points all the same.
• jessaustin 6y ago
  If communication has broken down, it may be because 'brownbat exhibits reason, good sense, and subject knowledge, while you just have a pipeline^Wtanker-ship fixation.