4.8 Review

N2 Fixation by Plasma-Activated Processes

期刊

JOULE
卷 5, 期 2, 页码 300-315

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.joule.2020.11.009

关键词

-

资金

  1. US Department of Energy, Basic Energy Sciences, Catalysis Program [DE-FG02-13ER16381, DE-SC0012704]
  2. US National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program [DGE 16-44869]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper compares the energy requirements, CO2 emissions, and commodity prices of alternative plasma-activated ammonia synthesis with the conventional Haber-Bosch process. Economic positive externalities are evaluated for renewable energy-powered modular ammonia production, with a 6-fold improvement in plasma process efficiency projected to make it competitive. Technological prospects for achieving the thresholds are discussed, including advancements in plasma-catalyst synergy and direct reactions of N-2 with plasma-activated water.
Sustainable nitrogen fixation could offset the significant environmental and societal costs associated with the energy-intensive conventional Haber-Bosch process (HB). This perspective compares the energy requirements, CO2 emissions, and commodity prices associated with alternative plasma-activated ammonia synthesis to those for HB. The threshold efficiency required for a plasma process to become competitive is established for various scenarios of H-2 sources, energy sources from natural gas to CO2-free renewable energy, and carbon pricing policies. Economic positive externalities are evaluated for renewable energy-powered modular ammonia production, which is projected to become competitive upon achieving a 6-fold improvement in plasma process efficiency. The technological prospects for achieving the thresholds are discussed, including advancements in plasma-catalyst synergy, direct reactions of N-2 with plasma-activated water, and plasma N-2 oxidation. A comparison of theoretical energy minima reveals that the energy required for plasma-activated nitrogen fixation might be lower than that for HB.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据