We Can Now Literally Pull Fuel Out of Thin Air

Pinkamena

Stuck in a vortex of sexy horses
Jun 27, 2011
2,371
0
0
Is OP unable of writing critical journalism or merely unaware of the first law of thermodynamics? These processes will by the laws of physics never be efficient.
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,489
0
0
Remus said:
FalloutJack said:
Remus said:
This is great news or people in, oh say, the greater Los Angeles area. Too bad it'll be years, decades even, before any method like this will be viable for widespread atmospheric decontamination.
Hey, fixing the environment is fixing the environment. If the air problem is solved via recycling in say 30 years, the quality of the planet bounces back, climate change issues get nipped in the bud, and people in SPACE get a nifty tool that allows them to breathe easier.
Pollution in general wasn't what I was referring to. It's the plant that's a gas version of the BP incident still spewing methane into the air as we speak. The air is literally flammable and very soon, the water will be too.
Well, I was thinking more 'long game' in that this could - even taking time - be a proper boon to mankind before situations grow too severe, which is certainly what we want.
 

Steve the Pocket

New member
Mar 30, 2009
1,649
0
0
Cartographer said:
Steve the Pocket said:
Cartographer said:
This is hardly news, else you're about 2 years late to the party.
I get that you're a US company and if it didn't happen in the USA then you're unlikely to have heard about it, but this technology was discovered, shown to be cost effective and reported in March 2014.
Don't bother to provide a link or anything; I'm sure everyone will believe you.
Because Google is hard?
Don't give me that shit. There was literally no reason not to just provide a link in the first place.
 

Cartographer

New member
Jun 1, 2009
212
0
0
Steve the Pocket said:
Cartographer said:
Steve the Pocket said:
Cartographer said:
This is hardly news, else you're about 2 years late to the party.
I get that you're a US company and if it didn't happen in the USA then you're unlikely to have heard about it, but this technology was discovered, shown to be cost effective and reported in March 2014.
Don't bother to provide a link or anything; I'm sure everyone will believe you.
Because Google is hard?
Don't give me that shit. There was literally no reason not to just provide a link in the first place.
Just because you display the same amount of ignorance as the article writer with regards to established technology, *I* should be the one to do the work filling in your educational chasms?

As I intimated, literally 2 words in google and all the information is there, if you're too lazy to even bother with that, there's no helping you.