Warships Powered by Algae: Katherine Mangu-Ward Discusses Military Spending on Alternative Fuels on CNBC


Reason Managing Editor Katherine Mangu-Ward discusses how military spending on alternative fuel sources will not only cost more than it should but the it should be left to the market to create efficient fuel products on CNBC. Air Date: August 29, 2012.

About 5.34 minutes.


NEXT: Isaac Knocks Power Out for 700,000 on Gulf Coast

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Why not a battleship powered by mangoo.

  2. The U.S. has retired all of its battleships, unfortunately. (Refurbishing old ships has far less benefits for the Congressional districts than building new ones.)

    The rest of this is pure waste and crony payoffs.

  3. I know I am picking nits here, but a ship in the Navy intended for fighting is a warship. A large, heavily armored ship armed with rifled cannon at least 12″ in diameter is a battleship. All battleships are warships but most warships are not battleships. There are no battleships on duty anywhere except as museums.

    It’s just a pet peeve of mine.

    1. Battleships were COOL!

      I mean, they were based on the same principles as dueling, but who can argue with giant cannon, for just plain coolness?

      Can’t we develop warships that run on nutria, though? Every port in the world would be begging the US Navy to come and load up on the things.

  4. Fixed! Thanks for the ship scoop, NeonCat.

    1. Warships seems so archaic and aggressive.

      Can’t we call them Defense Vessels?

      1. According to the latest Navy ad, they are more like Rescue and Charity Delivery Vehicles.

      2. I think we should go back to having a Department of War, with a Secretary of War.

        We should also create an Undersecretary of Fuck You.

        Why? I don’t much like war. The way to discourage people from starting shit with the US is to sound intimidating, not reticent.

        Furthermore, when it comes to the domestic political ramifications of war, I want it to sound like WAR from the get-go, not some shit like “intervention”. If we need to go to war, then let’s do it with our eyes open, at least.

        1. lol…never will be with Dems in charge.

    2. You’re welcome, glad you fixed it.

  5. The fact that you can talk to an audience on a computer, that you have a cell phone, that you have advanced techs is b/c the gov’t spent a lot of money on a little thing called the “moonshot.” Let’s see where it goes, it is worth the gamble. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    1. Oh, so now you want to make biofuels out of babies! And WE’RE the monsters.

      Sure, no one used computers or wanted to make wireless calls before NASA came along. No, private industry would never have done any of it without the benevolent spending of govt.

      1. Okkkaayyyyy…right. It’s a saying, sheesh. BTW, you need to watch “Soylent Green” if you think that way.

        So, you are saying we shouldn’t have NASA?

        I believe gov’t should always be limited but some gov’t expenditures are helpful. The less gov’t the better. The gov’t is charged with three tasks, one of which is to provide for the common defense. They also have to pursue liberty and happiness of life.

        1. Sorry, four…life.

  6. The cost-effective solution is to surround warsihps with an attendant fleet of steamer ducks force-fed leftover navy beans.

    This will allow each vessel to operate at flank speed by harvesting foi gras from its auxillaries

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.