PDA

View Full Version : Lockheed Martin may have solved world de-salination problem



Tamorlane
03-18-2013, 05:55 PM
Pentagon weapons-maker finds method for cheap, clean water

(Reuters) - A defense contractor better known for building jet fighters and lethal missiles says it has found a way to slash the amount of energy needed to remove salt from seawater, potentially making it vastly cheaper to produce clean water at a time when scarcity has become a global security issue.


"It's 500 times thinner than the best filter on the market today and a thousand times stronger," said John Stetson, the engineer who has been working on the idea. "The energy that's required and the pressure that's required to filter salt is approximately 100 times less."

Access to clean drinking water is increasingly seen as a major global security issue. Competition for water is likely to lead to instability and potential state failure in countries important to the United States, according to a U.S. intelligence community report last year.

"Between now and 2040, fresh water availability will not keep up with demand absent more effective management of water resources," the report said. "Water problems will hinder the ability of key countries to produce food and generate electricity."

About 780 million people around the world do not have access to clean drinking water, the United Nations reported last year.

rest of article http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/13/us-usa-desalination-idUSBRE92C05720130313

gjames017
03-18-2013, 05:59 PM
but the guberment cant fund stuff that actually helps people..this must be fake

Nemesiis
03-18-2013, 06:09 PM
but the guberment cant fund stuff that actually helps people..this must be fake

private company of peace

hayekforever
03-18-2013, 06:18 PM
Corporations are evil.










not srs

















semi srs

gjames017
03-18-2013, 06:36 PM
private company of peace

pretty sure the government pours hundreds of millions into that company every year


Pentagon weapons-maker finds method for cheap, clean water

ur not too bright are u

Roke
03-18-2013, 07:13 PM
In b4 this gets buried and nobody ever hears about it again while millions drink polluted water(if any).

sawoobley
03-18-2013, 07:22 PM
pretty sure the government pours hundreds of millions into that company every year


The government doesn't hire private companies?

Either way this looks promising. I want one.

Nemesiis
03-18-2013, 07:22 PM
pretty sure the government pours hundreds of millions into that company every year



ur not too bright are u

ur not too bright are you

I buy a Ford car
Ford is my car maker
I own Ford

gjames017
03-18-2013, 07:41 PM
ur not too bright are you

I buy a Ford car
Ford is my car maker
I own Ford

horrible analogy lol. The government (and others) basically pays this company to develop sht for it and supply a bunch of crap to it, is that so hard to understand? And lockheed martin is a public company btw moron.


Lockheed Martin is active in many aspects of government contracting. It received $36 billion in government contracts in 2008 alone, more than any company in history. It now does work for more than two dozen government agencies from the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy to the Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency. It's involved in surveillance and information processing for the CIA, the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the National Security Agency (NSA), the Pentagon, the Census Bureau and the Postal Service.

YuMadThough
03-18-2013, 07:55 PM
I'm not sure what to think about this.
On the one hand it's good that water scarcity might be less of an issue for the obvious reasons, but bad on the other in that this technology can be seen to transgress a barrier of natural limitations (fresh water) and result in potentially allowing larger populations of people to exist.

sawoobley
03-18-2013, 07:58 PM
I'm not sure what to think about this.
On the one hand it's good that water scarcity might be less of an issue for the obvious reasons, but bad on the other in that this technology can be seen to transgress a barrier of natural limitations (fresh water) and result in potentially allowing larger populations of people to exist.

lolwut

LeoDaVinci
03-18-2013, 07:58 PM
this technology can be seen to transgress a barrier of natural limitations (fresh water) and result in potentially allowing larger populations of people to exist.

But if Earf can be made to support them, why is that bad?

Cronoh
03-18-2013, 08:06 PM
I'm not sure what to think about this.
On the one hand it's good that water scarcity might be less of an issue for the obvious reasons, but bad on the other in that this technology can be seen to transgress a barrier of natural limitations (fresh water) and result in potentially allowing larger populations of people to exist.

If there were any natural limitations, we wouldn't be able to do it.

BeefyMcNasty
03-18-2013, 08:16 PM
pretty sure the government pours hundreds of millions into that company every year


By "pours" do you mean purchase a product made by a private corporation?

bluejay83
03-18-2013, 08:20 PM
pretty sure the government pours hundreds of millions into that company every year



yes... but it's not owned by the Gooberment, and it's still a private company.

derp derp

R&D dollars haveto go somewhere useful, not always into the hands of retarded College PHD kids.

5x10
03-18-2013, 08:22 PM
If there were any natural limitations, we wouldn't be able to do it.sounds likes we have solved the most important one, hopefully this is viable

YuMadThough
03-18-2013, 08:23 PM
lolwut

More usable water; more potential people being able to make use of it.
Makes sense no?


But if Earf can be made to support them, why is that bad?

For all of the reasons of why more people is bad: widening the gap between being able to be self-sufficient while increasing the strain on resources etc. Although it could be seen as just speeding up the process I guess so in that regards it doesn't really matter much.


If there were any natural limitations, we wouldn't be able to do it.

That's true but I'd imagine there will be at some point, there'll probably just be more people to experience the knock back if the water hurdle is overcome.

surf junkie
03-18-2013, 08:24 PM
All Hail Lockheed Martin

tnel00
03-18-2013, 08:29 PM
pretty sure the government pours hundreds of millions into that company every year



ur not too bright are u

Lockheed Martin is a private company with both governmental and commercial sources of income. They are a private company that would still exist if the Government didn't give them a penny. A lot smaller, but they'd still be viable.

gjames017
03-18-2013, 08:33 PM
By "pours" do you mean purchase a product made by a private corporation?

yes


Accounting for more than 80% of sales, the US government is the company's largest customer.

So if you don't think some of that ends up into R&D, and whatever is actually produced from that research will then inevitably end up being purchased again by the government ok.jpg..which is why I said they basically pay the company to develop sht for them.


yes... but it's not owned by the Gooberment, and it's still a private company.

derp derp


I never said anywhere that the company was owned by the government....and I said the "gubermnet" as a fukn joke people stop pooping your pants over it and taking everything so literally. If you want my reasoning for my first post itt look above. thanks for the neg by the way.

And there is a lockheed martin corporation traded on the NYSE. But I'm not an expert on this stuff so apoligeez for making some mistakes.

betaphaggler
03-18-2013, 08:42 PM
yes



So if you don't think some of that ends up into R&D, and whatever is actually produced from that research will then inevitably end up being purchased again by the government ok.jpg..which is why I said they basically pay the company to develop sht for them.



I never said anywhere that the company was owned by the government....and I said the "gubermnet" as a fukn joke people stop pooping your pants over it and taking everything so literally. If you want my reasoning for my first post itt look above. thanks for the neg by the way.

And there is a lockheed martin corporation traded on the NYSE. But I'm not an expert on this stuff so apoligeez for making some mistakes.

You don't have to apologize, you aren't Barack Obama, although you seem a little on the slow side.

The reason you don't have to apologize is for all intents and purposes this is a quasi private corporation, ALA Halliburton, a company that would be nowhere near where it is without Gubbmint hustling for them through money, exchanging employees, giving them money, paying off judges and outright favoritism.