Military Oil Consumption To Be Cut 50%

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Post Reply
MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Military Oil Consumption To Be Cut 50%

Post by MSimon »

Congress has mandated the military cut oil consumption by 50 percent, the Pentagon sees alternative energy production to be a crucial strategic effort.

http://www.element14.com/community/docs/DOC-38949
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

Skipjack
Posts: 6898
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

Good for them :)
Hopefully that means that the DOD will invest more in fusion and other nuclear energy systems.

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Skipjack wrote:Good for them :)
Hopefully that means that the DOD will invest more in fusion and other nuclear energy systems.
The difficulty is that when oil prices tank the military will be left with a bunch of high priced AE that will probably have to be replaced with high priced AE.

OTOH fusion might do the job. If it can be made to work.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

ladajo
Posts: 6267
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Post by ladajo »

The root of the eveil here is that oil reduction includes the option to use alternate green fuels. These fuels are ridiculous in price compared to oil based ones. The military is more and more being bled dry on mobility and sustainment funds to pay for these "effective" technologies that are not yet mature enough in lifecycle (especially when compared to alternatives) to support cost effective aquisition.

Skipjack
Posts: 6898
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

The difficulty is that when oil prices tank the military will be left with a bunch of high priced AE that will probably have to be replaced with high priced AE.
When have oil prices ever lowered (looked at from a long term perspective)?
On the scale of a decade, gas prices here have probably more than doubled...
So I think that if you plan ahead for a long time, it makes sense. Does not make sense in the short term though.
Generally, I would invest more into technology for a switch later, than making a switch now with technology that will be outdated soon.

hanelyp
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Post by hanelyp »

With that one move tech like a working polywell moves from "nice to have" to "without it the military is crippled."

KitemanSA
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

Along the line of SkipJack's thought, I opine that they should redesign many of their smaller ships to run off LFTRs with an eye toward the possibility that said LFTR would be lifted and replaced by a Polywell like machine.

JMHO

Skipjack
Posts: 6898
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

Along the line of SkipJack's thought, I opine that they should redesign many of their smaller ships to run off LFTRs with an eye toward the possibility that said LFTR would be lifted and replaced by a Polywell like machine.
I would vote for that too.

Giorgio
Posts: 3107
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

Why no one is voting for Rossi?

Skipjack
Posts: 6898
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

Why no one is voting for Rossi?
I am sure some here are...
I am hopeful but I would not bet any major investments on it.

Post Reply