Comments on: US Navy and Air Force Test Homegrown Jetfuel With 80% Less CO2

By: Mac McDougal

Mac McDougal — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:44:26 +0000

Hi Susan et al., I think the two commenters might be missing one of the points of your article. Russ says it’s expensive. Majortom says it’s inefficient (compared to the F-14). Both of these comments are beside the point, IMO. The points that matter are these:

First, a plant grown on marginal land can produce a fuel with enough chemical energy to meet a warplane’s demands. So it’s not some lab-only utopia; it’s a real world solution.

Second, a plant grown on marginal land will, apparently, reduce the CO2 footprint of jet aircraft operations. Anybody who has been following the Swiss government’s attempt to enable a real-world 2000 watt lifestyle knows that air travel is the Great Destroyer. That is, every aspect of a person’s life can now be lived under 2000 watts/year with no significant lifestyle impacts–except air travel.

Third and last, a plant grown on marginal land obviates the need to import energy from the Middle East, Nigeria, Venezuela, and other petro-dictatorships. We have all the marginal land anybody could want right here in the US of A.

To boil it down: Energy density and efficiency, a reduced carbon footprint, and energy security are all implicated in these tests. Now *those are things that could get a person excited

[SK: I agree, Mac. And I disagree with Russ that it is expensive. Because “marginal land” = cheap land. A plant that’s pretty much a weed, and grows without pesticides in the 5 huge empty States that can’t grow food and have little other economy like North Dakota… all that adds up to a potentially very cheap jet fuel. Plus hugely climate friendly benefits: very encouraging experiment. ]

By: Mac McDougal

Mac McDougal — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:44:00 +0000

First, a plant grown on marginal land can produce a fuel with enough chemical energy to meet a warplane’s demands. So it’s not some lab-only utopia; it’s a real world solution.

To boil it down: Energy density and efficiency, a reduced carbon footprint, and energy security are all implicated in these tests. Now *those are things that could get a person excited

By: Swift Arrow

Swift Arrow — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:14:43 +0000

The best way to end the Environmental Crisis and to fund vulnerable country’s adaptation programs, is to heavily tax sale of war goods, and emissions from warfare.

[SK: Heh. Good luck passing that through our filibuster-riddled Senate! Great idea though! It is an issue. Have you ever noticed that you can see a definite uptick in the greenhouse gas emissions record during WWII – and then a drop afterwards (as Europe’s economy lay in ruins)]

By: Swift Arrow

Swift Arrow — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:14:00 +0000

The best way to end the Environmental Crisis and to fund vulnerable country’s adaptation programs, is to heavily tax sale of war goods, and emissions from warfare.

By: Swift Arrow

Swift Arrow — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:14:00 +0000

The best way to end the Environmental Crisis and to fund vulnerable country’s adaptation programs, is to heavily tax sale of war goods, and emissions from warfare.

By: majortom1981

majortom1981 — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:40:41 +0000

You know what wastes more energy. Replacing better f-14d’s with new not as good f-18 super hornets. I bet if they would have kept the f-014’s it would have saved a whole bunch more environmental resources that were used to mnake the hornets.

By: majortom1981

majortom1981 — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 12:40:00 +0000

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:34:00 +0000

Of course it would not cost as much in production as this first test costs.

Anyone who’s been in manufacturing will tell you that. R&D is THE most expensive part. But this kind of R&D is essential to innovation.

And finding green fuels are essential to the DOD.

By: russ

russ — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 16:08:16 +0000

The new jatophra!

Only 67.50 per gallon! Heck of a deal.

Many fuels will work – this is just show to pacify green types.

By: russ

russ — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 16:08:00 +0000

The new jatophra!

Only 67.50 per gallon! Heck of a deal.

Many fuels will work – this is just show to pacify green types.

By: Susan Kraemer

Susan Kraemer — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:34:03 +0000

Of course it would not cost as much in production as this first test costs.

Anyone who’s been in manufacturing will tell you that. R&D is THE most expensive part. But this kind of R&D is essential to innovation.

And finding green fuels are essential to the DOD.