Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: US Navy 'Game-Changer': Converting Seawater into Fuel [View all]daybranch
(1,309 posts)before everyone gets into their carbon neutral and efficiency calculations lets look at the specific situation. This is a way of keeping Naval ships from returning to a port to secure more fuel. This from the viewpoint of a Navy command lets ships stay out longer, lets them avoid a potential outage of jet fuel in an emergency etc. This change in the logistics chain reduces the number of ships needed by the Navy because they can be on station longer with the ability to fully react to any crises. It reduces the number of emergency resupply runs as jet fuel is exhausted. It may even allow the ship themselves to carry less jet fuel , even delaying purchases from the Koch Brothers et al. Do you think that preventing a lot of trips back to port may save a lot of fuel in total? I certainly do and the Navy does too.
Before you apply generalized analysis to something you need to make sure that they are appropriate. The Navy has a game changer- their game is defense and providing the best defense they can with less resources is a very admirable goal. It looks like they have carefully examined their resupply process for weak links and have found a way to deal with it that works very well. I say Kudos.
A lot of the messages disparaging the achievement are based on little knowledge of what the Navy needs or does. It is civilian centric and ignores that when the Navy performs its assigned mission using a better more effective method, it is good for all of us.
This application of generalized methods to evaluate more unique situations reminds me of the study they did of putting thermostats on baseboard heater versus relying on the simple hi, low, off settings. Most believe that a thermostat that could be set to 70 degrees or so and left there would result in the most energy savings. But it just was not true, as those who used the high , low, and off settings proved . They turned them on high until they felt warm. Lowered them to low or off if they got too hot, etc. But the most saving resulted because unlike those who had a thermostat and lowered the units during the night by several degrees, those without such controls turned them off entirely. My point is as H. L.Mencken said for every complicated problem there is a solution that is simple , direct, and wrong. The same should be said of many of the analyses shown here. Sometimes you need more details, more understanding before you can draw valid conclusions. The best person to draw the conclusion is the people in the situation. Again Kudos to the Navy and thank you Navy for maximizing your effectiveness in this manner.