Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The U.S. Navy Just Announced The End Of Big Oil And No One Noticed [View all]Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)52. It's meant to be a fuel source, not a power source
These are different things. Basically it's intended to fuel engines that rely on hydrocarbon input, since it would be amazingly expensive to retrofit the navy fleet with, say, solar electric engines.
It's a stopgap measure for a specific purpose, not a general-use panacea.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
91 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The U.S. Navy Just Announced The End Of Big Oil And No One Noticed [View all]
Katashi_itto
Nov 2014
OP
We're already putting far more CO2 into the oceans than this could pull out
muriel_volestrangler
Nov 2014
#29
That actually won't be a problem due to the rising concentration of CO2 worldwide, due to human
AtheistCrusader
Nov 2014
#71
It went from 360 to 390 PPM in 10 years last decade. And this doesn't add to it.
AtheistCrusader
Nov 2014
#74
You say that as if over-saturating the oceans with CO2 doesn't have any consequences.
AtheistCrusader
Nov 2014
#81
Then Exxon and the other bastards are gonna charge you to truck sea water to your car.
Hoppy
Nov 2014
#5
That type of model engine runs on alcohol and possibly added nitromethane, not jet fuel or gasoline
Fumesucker
Nov 2014
#20
This is just too cool. Thanks for posting, I missed it when the news first broke.
RiverLover
Nov 2014
#8
That's true, and I think the earlier objections didn't mean 'greenhouse', specifically but some
AtheistCrusader
Nov 2014
#86
Nuclear power is almost like solar in that the $$$ cost of the fuel isn't what makes it expensive.
hunter
Nov 2014
#46
It would be cheaper for land transportation to use electricity from the nuclear plants
muriel_volestrangler
Nov 2014
#30
And water used in this process doesn't cease to exist. It goes right back into the hydrologic cycle
AtheistCrusader
Nov 2014
#72
The US could build desalination plants like much of the rest of the world
nationalize the fed
Nov 2014
#58
Ummm ... no, it didn't. It found an expensive way to convert one form of energy to another.
eppur_se_muova
Nov 2014
#37
The new Fuel Cell Cars allow for all the driving anyone wants to do
nationalize the fed
Nov 2014
#57
Yes, this is mainly a way to make nuclear aircraft carriers more self-sufficient
caraher
Nov 2014
#59