US Navy Tests Boat Powered by Algae

[sunzt]

wait till you figure out how much it costed to land a man on the moon

 

[The Boston Dangler]

wait till you figure out how much it costed to land a man on the moon

it costed just as much as what US women spent on cosmetics in that period.

 

[WildHorse]

``

 

[BeauJangles]

It is but your point is true, too.



My point is that we're broke. Delay it a year or two. Oil will last until then or, Lord forbid, we drill more offshore.

Out of ALL the current activities of our nation's military, you really want to axe 8.1 million dollars spent on trying to find alternative sources of energy? How about the billions we've laid down for new aircraft and weapons, or the hundreds of billions we're funneling overseas into two wars?

At least this money is actually an investment in something.

 

[Bignate603]

Nikola Tesla powered a boat in front of hundreds of witnesses with apparently NO FUEL

Over 100 years ago

(A car too)

SO whatever happened to that know-how? OVER 100 YEARS AGO

http://de-construct.net/e-zine/?p=3418

"Fill 'er up! Here's your bill..."

What's your point? He also claimed to have a death ray and a machine that could create earthquakes. He was a nut case (albeit a brilliant one) that had a tendency to claim ridiculous things.

 

[drinkmorejava]

I'm just copying myself from dailytech, but the price is legitimate.

I can guarantee you that they had to stand up a plant for the order...which would justify the cost.

The Air Force had to do that with it's SPK fuel tests, although they had to buy considerably more fuel, resulting in <25% of the cost per gallon. A large turbofan will happily burn 10k lbs of fuel per hour.

HRJ fuel has been significantly cheaper because there are already commercial manufacturers, but it's still a few X more than regular gas or JP-8.

There are a number of facilities that can give you a few gallons of whatever you want for analysis, but that wont get you far in testing.

 

[WildHorse]

``

 

[Brainonska511]

Point: something superior to deriving power from polluting combustion is DEFINITELY OUT THERE!!! It was proved by Tesla!

What are you talking about? The only thing that I can think you're talking about is Tesla's wireless power was very inefficient and required very large towers with somewhat limited range for distribution. And that still requires a normal source of electricity to power the tower.

We can already get electricity without combustion: wind power, nuclear power, solar power, geothermal power, tidal power.....

Tesla gave us AC, flourescent light, x-rays, the RADIO, and a ton more.

He didn't "give us" x-rays. There were many people at work in that area besides Tesla. Same with radio. Tesla definitely made excellent contributions to electricity, but he wasn't the be-all-end-all you seem to imply.