http://news.yahoo.com/u-navys-great-gre ... 40024.html

So when they say it was 26 bucks per gallon, are they folding R&D costs into the pricetag? Does that include the price of having to truck the crap in because the Navy doesn't currently have a regular supplier of the stuff? Can someone more awake than me explain?

My understanding is that this was just a demonstration and not an actual switchover by the Navy. I suppose the price would drop if they streamlined logistics or set up their own grease distillery/production line.

judgepacker wrote:http://news.yahoo.com/u-navys-great-gre ... 40024.html

So when they say it was 26 bucks per gallon, are they folding R&D costs into the pricetag? Does that include the price of having to truck the crap in because the Navy doesn't currently have a regular supplier of the stuff? Can someone more awake than me explain?

My understanding is that this was just a demonstration and not an actual switchover by the Navy. I suppose the price would drop if they streamlined logistics or set up their own grease distillery/production line.

Hard to say how they cost fuel. I've read a gallon of gasoline costs over $400 a gallon by the time it gets to Afghanistan. The Navy's been working on fueling at least one carrier group alternatively. They probably got a pretty good idea of what's coming in the oil markets at some point. From 2009:

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/10/14/navy- ... en-hornet/

Demo/proof of concept/support for developing the technology. Not a current changeover.

You want your military to have options so it's not dependent on one single fuel type.

CDFingers

The military clearly understand the strategic precariousness of their dependence on fossil fuels and are taking the long view. They are also studying and planning for wars related to water access.