Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US Navy 'Game-Changer': Converting Seawater into Fuel
Industry Week ^ | Apr 7, 2014 | Agence France-Presse

Posted on 04/07/2014 6:48:56 PM PDT by Leaning Right

The U.S. Navy believes it has finally worked out the solution to a problem that has intrigued scientists for decades: how to take seawater and use it as fuel.

(Excerpt) Read more at industryweek.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alreadyposted; globalwarminghoax; navy; opec; seawater
Evidentally, carbon dioxide and hydrogen are extracted from seawater. Then a catalytic converter is used to transform the carbon dioxide and hydrogen into a liquid hydrocarbon fuel.

Now here's where I'm scratching my head. Where does the energy come from to do the extraction in the first place? The article is not clear on that. So I'm guessing that it must come from a nuclear reactor aboard an aircraft carrier.

1 posted on 04/07/2014 6:48:56 PM PDT by Leaning Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
"Where does the energy come from to do the extraction in the first place?"

Deuterium fusion, of the colder variety.

2 posted on 04/07/2014 6:53:20 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

They use a reactor fueled, in part, with Unobtanium.


3 posted on 04/07/2014 6:53:31 PM PDT by Darteaus94025 (Can't have a Liberal without a Lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
No it's not nuclear.

What they have is a couple hundred thousand of these things hanging off the sides of the ship which they can tap into...


4 posted on 04/07/2014 6:53:54 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

The million dollar questions are: is it practical and is it economical? Or is it like the “fabled” ECAT cold fusion hand warmer?


5 posted on 04/07/2014 6:56:56 PM PDT by RetiredTexasVet (Unintended Consequences: Expanded Autism Spectrum now includes the entire Obama Administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Darteaus94025

Name Unobtanium
Symbol Uo
Number 9201
Kinkiness moderate to high

Physical Properties

Melting point 2075 °C, or maybe 2075 °F
Boiling point -7440 °C, or maybe -7440 °F


6 posted on 04/07/2014 6:57:47 PM PDT by the_daug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

Dont worry - Zero will outlaw it as threat to environment......


7 posted on 04/07/2014 6:59:03 PM PDT by njslim (T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
Tom Cruise is helping the Navy as Tech 49:


8 posted on 04/07/2014 7:03:58 PM PDT by DTogo (High time to bring back The Sons of Liberty !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

The second page of the article says the cost would be $6 to $7 dollars a barrel.

If that is the case then can the system be ginned up to mass market levels?

If so there are going to be a lot of unemployed roughnecks who used to work in oil fields


9 posted on 04/07/2014 7:04:00 PM PDT by Fai Mao (Genius at Large)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
FWIW, here is NRL's release.

Here is a 2009 blurb talking about the basic process.

10 posted on 04/07/2014 7:07:08 PM PDT by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
Nothing new here. Jethro Bodine invented a pill to do that fifty years ago.


11 posted on 04/07/2014 7:09:24 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao
I think this is another gov't "10 year plan".

Hopefully I'm wrong, but don't hold your breath.

12 posted on 04/07/2014 7:11:57 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

What is the caliber of those bullets?


13 posted on 04/07/2014 7:12:30 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
Solar Powered Dryer.


14 posted on 04/07/2014 7:14:20 PM PDT by MuttTheHoople (Nothing is more savage and brutal than justifiably angry Americans. Don’t believe me? Ask the Germa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

I believe that’s a chicken he’s holding not a bullet.


15 posted on 04/07/2014 7:14:25 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

BULLETS, NOT pullets(s).


16 posted on 04/07/2014 7:16:26 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao

So basically, I assume, since nuke powerplants cannot be shut down, when not used for power, they would produce this stuff..


17 posted on 04/07/2014 7:17:03 PM PDT by lavaroise (A well regulated gun being necessary to the state, the rights of the militia shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

The basic process looks to be a form of the ww2 German synthetic fuels from coal.. however you need a powersource to crack the seawater in to hydrogen and co2 The article says its electrical an electrical at sea they are talking nuclear. Because the logic of this is the Navy does not want the logistics of obtain and transportation liquid fuel...


18 posted on 04/07/2014 7:23:03 PM PDT by tophat9000 (Are we headed to a Cracker Slacker War?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: who_would_fardels_bear
If I'm not mistaken, the picture you posted in #4 is classified. The least you could have done is obscure the hat.

Now it's only a matter of time before North Korea starts deploying massive energy-producing drinking birds.

19 posted on 04/07/2014 7:30:40 PM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I holding this lantern? I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao
The second page of the article says the cost would be $6 to $7 dollars a barrel.

I saw $3-$6/gallon. At that price is would be a little expensive for auto fuel, but might be worth it for a carrier to avoid the logistics problems of delivering jet fuel to it. Since nuclear reactors work best at a constant power output, it might be useful at night when nuclear plants on land are underutilized. Also if the production method can handle intermittent power like solar or wind, it might be a good storage method for those forms of energy (with the added benefit of a surplus of rare bird feathers for ladies' hats like in the Edwarian era from the eagle whacking turbines.).

If that is the case then can the system be ginned up to mass market levels?

Hmm, nuclear gin. I can see some glow in the dark martinis from Charenkov radiation.

20 posted on 04/07/2014 7:41:45 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (Republican amnesty supporters don't care whether their own homes are called mansions or haciendas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: who_would_fardels_bear

yes!


21 posted on 04/07/2014 7:45:30 PM PDT by Rob the Ugly Dude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

That reminds me of a Dirk Pitt novel.

http://www.amazon.com/Valhalla-Rising-Dirk-Pitt-Adventure/dp/0736671684/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top


22 posted on 04/07/2014 7:52:01 PM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao
"The predicted cost of jet fuel using the technology is in the range of three to six dollars per gallon, say experts at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, who have already flown a model airplane with fuel produced from seawater."

Three dollars per gallon would be magnificent!

23 posted on 04/07/2014 7:53:34 PM PDT by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

And the contract to develop this new fuel will probably go to an Obama contributor who will admit failure in a few years, but only after spending billions of tax payers dollars.


24 posted on 04/07/2014 8:15:33 PM PDT by DJ Taylor (Once again our country is at war,and once again the Democrats have sided with our enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
Deuterium fusion, of the colder variety.

Impossible: Kevmo did not post the article.

25 posted on 04/07/2014 8:27:22 PM PDT by FredZarguna (Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

“Where does the energy come from to do the extraction in the first place? The article is not clear on that. So I’m guessing that it must come from a nuclear reactor aboard an aircraft carrier.”

Yes. And she’s talking about jet fuel.


26 posted on 04/07/2014 8:56:56 PM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

Apparently they’ll use electricity. Still no word on where the electricity comes from.


27 posted on 04/07/2014 9:07:55 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DJ Taylor

Obama will never allow this to happen. The greenie fringe would melt down.


28 posted on 04/07/2014 9:15:33 PM PDT by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Darteaus94025
They use a reactor fueled, in part, with Unobtanium.

Very close.

Actually, it's updidasium (discovered in the '50s.)

.

29 posted on 04/07/2014 9:33:14 PM PDT by Seaplaner (Never give in. Never give in. Never...except to convictions of honour and good sense. W. Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao
If so there are going to be a lot of unemployed roughnecks who used to work in oil fields

They'll find new work in the salt water conversion plants. The big news is that the middle east will have its money machine cut off. No more funding for terrorists.
30 posted on 04/08/2014 12:32:26 AM PDT by redheadtoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

Would 6 to 7 dollars a gallon be cheaper than the cost of hauling the jet fuel out to the carrier battle group? If so, this reduces the logistical requirements.


31 posted on 04/08/2014 2:54:15 AM PDT by Fred Hayek (The Democratic Party is now the operational arm of the CPUSA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao

3 to 6 Dollars a GALLON.
don’t shut down those oil fields yet...


32 posted on 04/08/2014 3:30:38 AM PDT by Kozak ("It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal" Henry Kissinger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kozak

Jet fuel us around $4.79 per gallon.


33 posted on 04/08/2014 6:16:04 AM PDT by Sawdring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson