Posted on 04/07/2014 9:18:38 AM PDT by DeaconBenjamin
Nothing new. I remember back in the 50’s there was a pill that once you filled your tank with water, you could drop into the tank and turn the water into gasoline. I think there were perpetual motion machines back then too.
They say the cost is about $6 per gallon. That number is in the economic range.
If it was $25 per gallon I would say nice try, keep trying. But $6 gives a green light especially when they say they are working to improve the yield gained from the process. If there is success with increasing yields, then costs can enter the competitive market range.
This reads like the cover of Popular Mechanics.
Sure. All you need is lots of heat and lots of pressure. I mean LOTS of heat and LOTS of pressure, like that found when a star goes nova or is ripped apart by a black hole. I'm working on solving this dilemma in my garage.
True but we’re talking about US Navy Research, not the federal government. Our military research is awesome!
One could get it from the exhalations of the crew, or from following oil burning ships, or the ever increasing concentration in the Atmosphere (CO2 is also dissolved in the Ocean).
...and jetpacks! (there really were)
It doesn’t make sense, if they have such a power source, it will provide more security making the US energy independent than keeping it secret on Navy vessels.
CO2. There’s lots of CO2 dissolved in seawater. In fact oceans are a huge sink for CO2, which of course our esteemed Gore-certified climate changeologists ignore.
Used ta B.
Before the NSF and its running off the rails into the Social "Sciences" weeds, the DoD used to support all sorts of University Departments with contracts (Basic research and Applied) (and Labs full of equipment with brass DoD inventory tags...).
I figure that if a smarter guy like Newton couldn't do it, my time would be better devoted to other stuff (like teaching my dog to climb out of the water onto her own "trailer" kayak).
Heavy Water fusion.
“It doesnt make sense, if they have such a power source, it will provide more security making the US energy independent than keeping it secret on Navy vessels.”
I don’t know what they have or don’t have. I just know they are funding a new type of fusion reactor that promising cheap and safe energy without hazardous radioactive pollution. I also see they want rail guns which, they can barely power one with the two LCS they designed. And those ships have more electrical generating capacity than any other ship of it’s size.
Maybe they are just dreaming. Because honestly some of the ships in the navy strike me as sucking out loud. One 5 inch gun as the main offensive weapon iirc.
More than one university campus has a working cyclotron bult by the Army.
They were built in the late 50s to early 60s.
Doubt anhy being built today.
Those were the days (slightly post Sputnik).
Used to have 8 nuclear cruisers but they are gone. All our subs are nuclear.
The Climate Change Alarmists are going to hate this!
If we’re able to make clean, easy to get fuel, they won’t be able to use the AGW scam to help them achieve world wide Socialist control.
“Giving society cheap abundant energy is . . .
like giving an idiot child a machine gun.”
-Paul Ehrlich (Econazi)
The undisclosed but obviously crucial power source is the real point of this story. This is a crypto-announcement of that power source! And we know it’s not portable, or it could be used on planes directly instead of being used to make fuel for planes. So the sucker is big.
Some submarines? Except for one small research sub, every submarine in the US Navy has been nuclear powered for 24 years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.