Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

555 comments

Invade! (5, Funny)

Zouden (232738) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415132)

I hear Halliburton has already won the tender.

Re:Invade! (2, Insightful)

Duhavid (677874) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415360)

You don't get it.

This is all my plan to get the human race into space.

Re:Invade! (4, Funny)

lendude (620139) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415380)

Nah - Weyland-Yutani has got a lock-in on that one.

Re:Invade! (5, Funny)

DigitalWallaby (853269) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415386)

Lucky it's not Uranus where these 'hydrocarbons' were found.

Otherwise there would already be a proposal to go out there and drill it.

Re:Invade! (5, Funny)

linumax (910946) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415520)

Invade?! I suppose the right word would be 'liberate'.

Re:Invade! (1)

cuantar (897695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415692)

Yes, those poor, unfortunate, oppressed molecules! Their current natural regime hasn't ever allowed them the opportunity to blow of steam inside a terrstrial internal combustion engine! We'll just have to save them.

Mars? (3, Insightful)

__NR_kill (1018116) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415140)

I think we chose the wrong planet for a mission. We need to go to Saturn..

Re:Mars? (4, Interesting)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415456)

I agree, it seriously pisses me off to see the long term plans being sketched up for a return to Moon, and then out to Mars. The budget that will end up comparably quite small to other US gov't agencies, but huge for NASA. When what I think what would be far more exciting, and with much more of an impact potential, would be to send out a probe to Enceladus [wikipedia.org] and Europa [wikipedia.org] . Both quite potential candidates for having oceans of liquid water beneath due to tidal heating from the extreme gravitational pull of their respective giant planets.

With how things are moving and how poorly NASA, ESA, and others first prioritized the ISS mission and now this thing to Mars where people will take a stroll and perhaps not find that much more than what the current rovers are finding (although yes, it will make a huge media impact for a week or so, or maybe even a month, before it disappears into the back of peoples' minds), I have low expectations on that I'll even be alive by the time we get to those moons perhaps harboring life, despite we probably having the technology for the job today!

We have identified water ice on the surface of Enceladus, we have strong support of there being active water volcanism there similar to Earth's geysers, we know not much sunlight is needed to pass through the surface to harbor life judging by extremophiles on Earth, and if there is water beneath, there'd be more water there than on Earth! Yet, we try to hunt water on Mars by theories so hard that we're to the brink of seeing what we want to see, and design a gargantuan long term exploration effort to go there. *sigh*

Re:Mars? (4, Insightful)

Cassius Corodes (1084513) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415546)

As an aside, I think finding extremophiles on Earth doesn't really support the notion that life could occur in extreme environments. All it says is that after life has originated it can adapt to extreme environments - the requirements for abiogenesis are likely to be much more stringent then for post abiogenesis-adaptation.

Re:Mars? (0, Troll)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415704)

"I think we chose the wrong planet for a mission. We need to go to Saturn.."

so how long before we find WMDs on Saturn and we invade?

Don't tell the president (0, Troll)

Yossarian45793 (617611) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415144)

Nobody tell George W Bush about this or we'll be spending a fortune on a space invasion...

Re:Don't tell the president (1)

lee1026 (876806) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415188)

Well, a massive boost to the NASA budget would be a very good thing.

Re:Don't tell the president (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415190)

I know you're joking, but why exactly would that be a bad thing?

Re:Don't tell the president (1)

Kinky Bass Junk (880011) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415416)

Money has to come from somewhere.

Re:Don't tell the president (2, Insightful)

x2A (858210) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415510)

And where do you think it's going to go? People will be paid with it to put their time into collecting the resources and developing the rocket to go into space. Just because the result of the work is going into space, doesn't mean the money is. The money will stay on earth, in the pockets of eg rocket engineers who will spend it on food 'n housing. So it's nowhere near as bad as it sounds.

Re:Don't tell the president (1)

Kinky Bass Junk (880011) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415572)

Don't forget the cost of the parts and the fuel to get there. Those costs will end up in corporate coffers which are largely untaxed. The amount that comes back into the government would be so watered down that so much else would suffer.

They sure as hell aren't going to be taking the money out of the military budget, so where else would it come from?

Re:Don't tell the president (1)

x2A (858210) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415658)

"Those costs will end up in corporate coffers which are largely untaxed."

That sounds to me more like the problem that needs to be solved than the government spending money on space research/travel.

"The amount that comes back into the government would be so watered down"

I'm more concerned with money that comes back into the economy as a whole than the government. Any money that gets respent is okay, money that gets taken out of the economy and added to massive corporate reserves is definitely a big problem.

Re:Don't tell the president (-1, Offtopic)

jimmydevice (699057) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415430)

A Bush comment gets a -1 troll? Looks like slashdot is getting astroturf patch.

Re:Don't tell the president (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415560)

A Bush comment gets a -1 troll? Looks like slashdot is getting astroturf patch.
Yes, it's too, too terribly true.

All the anti-Bush comments are systematically being modded into oblivion, while the pro-Bush paeans are marked (+5, Insightful).

That's why, to the casual observer, Slashdot looks like the online chapter of the George W. Bush Fan Club.

(... well, either that, or perhaps every once in a while a Troll is actually marked as such. The jury's still out on this matter ...)

Re:Don't tell the president (0, Offtopic)

x2A (858210) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415678)

No, a stupid comment gets a -1 troll. The fact that it mentions bush is irrelevant.

All we need now (3, Interesting)

treeves (963993) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415174)

are some vast hydrocarbon-propelled rockets to bring a big load of it back here in 10 years or so.

Re:All we need now (5, Funny)

Asky314159 (1114009) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415350)

Yeah, that'd be great! Maybe if we burn the same amount of hydrocarbons getting the tanker out and back as the tanker itself hauls, it can be marketed as a "carbon neutral" energy source!

Gattaca (2, Funny)

Adambomb (118938) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415184)

Oh great, so now theres no reason for Vincent to go there. Stop ruining fiction, reality!

Next up (2, Funny)

eclectro (227083) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415200)

The TV show "Jed Clampett, astronaut," appears.

DUDE!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415202)

Let's totally shoot at with roman candles!

Re:DUDE!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415498)

At the risk of ruining a shitty joke, I'm going to go ahead and say that nothing will happen, because there's probably very little oxygen there.

Time for Space tankers to start taking flight (1)

xeoron (639412) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415216)

Hrm... It would be interesting if the cost of harvesting it outweighted the investment to build the infostructure to bring it back to our planet.

Re:Time for Space tankers to start taking flight (3, Insightful)

ROMRIX (912502) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415324)

Hrm... It would be interesting if the cost of harvesting it outweighted the investment to build the infostructure to bring it back to our planet.

It does.

Re:Time for Space tankers to start taking flight (-1, Flamebait)

Gojira Shipi-Taro (465802) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415378)

And your basing that on...?

Seriously. You're nobody. Provide a reference, or you will not be taken seriously.

Re:Time for Space tankers to start taking flight (5, Insightful)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415522)

And your basing that on...?

The Cassini-Huygens mission cost more than $3 billion to land a 350 kg probe on titan. If the probe were made out of 100% gasoline, that would cost $30,000,000 per gallon, and that's not even factoring in the cost of a (currently technically infeasible) a return trip.

So you've got at least 7 orders of magnitude of cost reductions to work through before you're competitive with terrestrial fossil fuels.

Re:Time for Space tankers to start taking flight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415578)

Did you forget that this is Slashdot?

Re:Time for Space tankers to start taking flight (1)

Radres (776901) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415396)

Hrm... How interesting!

Re:Time for Space tankers to start taking flight (4, Interesting)

tempestdata (457317) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415530)

Hrm... It would be interesting if the cost of harvesting it outweighted the investment to build the infostructure to bring it back to our planet.
Even if bringing back those hydrocarbons to Earth was cost effective. I'm not sure it would be a good Thing.

I've always drawn solace from the fact that eventually oil will run out and we'll stop pumping smog into the air. Can you imagine if we were not suddenly able to pump hundreds of times that amount into the air before we ran out?? Holy smokes!

On the other hand, it would also be such an awesome thing for investment in science and space travel. If some portion of the extraction process needed human oversight, it would be an awesome thing for manned space travel. The building of the infrastructure, to support the mining of Titan itself would really be a milestone in human history. The point at which man kind ceased to harness the resources of his own planet, and started to harness the resources of his solar system. If infrastructure were built to mine Titan, it would make sense to resuse a large chunk of it to mine the asteroids too. The possibilities boggle the mind.

Would it be worth it though?

Re:Time for Space tankers to start taking flight (5, Insightful)

hardburn (141468) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415656)

If we had the technology to haul hydrocarbons from another planet economically, we'd have the technology to do away with hydrocarbons completely. Once you have cheap access to space, a bunch of different energy source open up. Take your pick: solar satellites, He3 from the moon for advanced nuclear reactors, hydrogen from Jupiter's atmosphere, and probably a bunch of others that nobody's thought up yet. Cars will either need to become electric or run on Fischer-Tropes produced gas.

This announcement is interesting scientifically, but has no relevance to energy problems.

Would it be worth it though? (1)

mevets (322601) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415666)

Take another draw on the bong, and maybe you can tell us...

Iraq invasion money could've been better spent (1)

GoatRavisher (779902) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415226)

Since he likes playing dress-up maybe W should go on a "fact finding" mission to Titan.

in related news (4, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415236)

1. Titan found to have WMDs

2. GW Bush orders the militarization of NASA

3. "Mission Accomplished" announced before probes with frickin' laser beams get past the orbit of Mars

Auchhqa! (2, Funny)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415344)

I was just about to write something about suddenly finding a need to invade Titan because of their despotic leader... but you beat me to the punch!

'Cause, you know, this is an original joke that, eh, we've never seen before around these parts....

Re:in related news (1)

Huxley_Dunsany (659554) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415352)

Dammit, I just logged in to make the same joke!

Well done.

so.... (2, Interesting)

JeanBaptiste (537955) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415238)

if all our stuff supposedly came from dead dinosaurs, what does this mean?

Re:so.... (0)

x2A (858210) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415434)

Options:

A - Titan has had hundreds of times more dinosaurs than us that are now all hydrocarbons.
B - Titan's hydrocarbons come from something other than [just] dinosaurs.
C - The reading is incorrect; Titan has no hydrocarbons.

Other relevant options:
A - Our hydrocarbons didn't [all] come from dinosaurs.

Call me Uninformed...but (4, Interesting)

Marc_Hawke (130338) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415248)

Aren't the hydrocarbons on earth (oil, coal, etc) the remains of LIFE? They've always been called 'fossil fuels.' We're burning dinosaurs.

So...where did these big extra-terrestrial reserves come from?

(Simple answer would be, "That's not the only way hydro-carbons form" but I've never heard that mentioned before.)

Re:Call me Uninformed...but (3, Insightful)

Doppler00 (534739) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415322)

Maybe another way to think of it is that earth used to be like Titan and had a vast sea of hydrocarbons too until life evolved to metabolize it and turn it into living things.

Re:Call me Uninformed...but (1)

Tassach (137772) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415538)

I forget his name, but there's a rather famous geologist who's been saying for years that petroleum is created by geologic, not organic, processes. For the most part he's been dismissed as a crank. Perhaps this is the evidence to get the establishment to start taking him more seriously.

Re:Call me Uninformed...but (4, Informative)

exultavit (988075) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415326)

Take a gander at: abiogenic petroleum origin [wikipedia.org] .

Unfortunately, or fortunately (depending on your point of view), almost all the evidence is against abiogenic terrestrial petroleum.

Re:Call me Uninformed...but (1)

nguy (1207026) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415642)

The evidence is against near-surface deposits being of non-biological origin. There is no evidence either for or against deep deposits being of non-biological origin. So, I think we simply don't know how much, if any, oil is of abiogenic origin. Unfortunately, this has become a political and commercial hot potato.

From an environmental point of view, we should hope it's false because if there is substantially more oil and gas than we think there is, we will sooner or later transform Earth into Venus. In fact, this is well what may have happened to Venus...

Re:Call me Uninformed...but (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415328)

Back in the '40s, those were not called dinosaurs but Jews. joke..

Re:Call me Uninformed...but (1)

Inominate (412637) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415442)

It's a little bit crackpot, but there is speculation that oil, and especially methane on earth comes from non-biological sources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin [wikipedia.org]

crackpot??? (2, Insightful)

PuckSR (1073464) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415712)

It isn't exactly crackpot, especially when applied to hydrocarbons on Titan.

We know that oil can be created without 'dead dinosaurs'. It is rejected because of evidence on Earth that points towards the idea that oil is the byproduct of biomass.

However, if most geologists were told that oil had been discovered on another planet then they would probably assume it was non-organic. We only assume it is organic because of other factors.

So, quit confusing people. It is crackpot to think that oil on Earth is abiogenic. It is perfectly sane and rational to think that hydrocarbons on another planet are the result of abiogenic processes.

Serious misnomer (1)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415588)

Coal is a fossil fuel. I often dig up bits of coal with plants etc embedded in them.

Oil, well there are tow camps: the fossil fuel camp (typically popular in the west) and the abiotic oil camp that says that oil is just a mineral reaction (typically popular in the east).

Re:Call me Uninformed...but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415640)

Methane is a hydro carbon. It's found in more places in the universe then I care to count.

Aztec Gold (1)

Arakageeta (671142) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415250)

And there were cities paved with gold in the Americas.

That's okay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415268)

I'm pretty sure the Titans are jealous of Earth's vast water reserves, which (as they say) "droppeth as the gentle dew from Heaven, Upon the place beneath".

Big deal (4, Insightful)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415276)

By the time the cost of technology required to go to Titan falls to a reasonable level, we should have already passed the need to use hydrocarbons as our main source of energy.

Re:Big deal (0, Troll)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415316)

hydrocarbons are good for lots of things besides fuel, numbnuts.

Re:Big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415394)

LOTS of things? My, how insightful you are! Thanks for sharing!

Re:Big deal (1)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415424)

Nice going with the ad hominem. But if you actually read the article, it's written in such a way as to suggest it as a source of fuel:

Proven reserves of natural gas on Earth total 130 thousand million tons, enough to provide 300 times the amount of energy the entire United States uses annually for residential heating, cooling and lighting. Dozens of Titan's lakes individually have the equivalent of at least this much energy in the form of methane and ethane.

Re:Big deal (5, Funny)

thrillseeker (518224) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415674)

hydrocarbons are good for lots of things besides fuel, numbnuts

Does one rub it on to get that effect?

pointless (5, Funny)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415284)

tree huggers will march on the white house demanding the save titan from the evil corporations and their explotation of a defensless moon.

Re:pointless (1)

bh_doc (930270) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415336)

There aren't any trees on Titan to hug. As far as we know...

Re:pointless (1)

Gojira Shipi-Taro (465802) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415406)

That won't stop idiots from protesting.

Re:pointless (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415438)

tree huggers
Wow dude, the Arctic ocean will be free of summer ice by 2013 and you're still calling environmentalists "tree huggers"?

Re:pointless (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415452)

Not Titan! We're peaceful, we have no weapons!

Rather pointless for energy reasons... (1)

TripMaster Monkey (862126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415292)

A mission out to Titan to collect a load of hydrocarbons would cost far more energy than the load would be worth. We'd be much better off investing in an orbital solar power station.

Re:Rather pointless for energy reasons... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415382)

No, it would be a one-time trip. Send humans up to set up a station in low orbit around Titan. Since the hydrocarbons 'rain' out of the atmosphere of Titan you could feasibly harvest the 'airborne' hydrocarbons and simply calculate a launch trajectory to a receiving station in Earth orbit. The humans that fly out, eh, for a greater cause.

Re:Rather pointless for energy reasons... (1)

mi (197448) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415476)

A mission out to Titan to collect a load of hydrocarbons would cost far more energy than the load would be worth.

Same is true about Iraq's oil... Does not stop millions of idiots world-wide from claiming, ours is a "War for Oil".

Re:Rather pointless for energy reasons... (2, Informative)

physicsnick (1031656) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415568)

Same is true about Iraq's oil...
No it's not. The people profiting from Iraqi oil are not the people paying for the war.

Re:Rather pointless for energy reasons... (1)

Voline (207517) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415622)

A mission out to Titan to collect a load of hydrocarbons would cost far more energy than the load would be worth.
Same is true about Iraq's oil... Does not stop millions of idiots world-wide from claiming, ours is a "War for Oil".

It may be true that Iraq's oil will turn out to be more expensive to seize than it is worth. But the people benefiting from the war are not the one's paying for it. So in their calculations it is a great deal.

The public bears the costs and certain well-connected corporations reap the benefits.

If you still think that the invasion of Iraq was about "WMD" or bringing democracy to that country and not cold hard cash, you are worse than an idoit. You are a sucker.

Re:Rather pointless for energy reasons... (1)

Conception (212279) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415564)

While that is true, it does possibly mean that you could have a base near Titan with a rich power source near by.

You Silly Humans... (1)

phorest (877315) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415294)

You still insist on calling hydro-carbons "fossil-fuels".

Moreover (2, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415302)

By an amazing coincidence, Titan doesn't actually have democracy over there...

Yet.

Re:Moreover (1)

Panaflex (13191) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415422)

Best comment yet!

We just misheard (5, Funny)

Chairboy (88841) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415330)

"That's no moon. It's a gas station!"

Re:We just misheard (1)

Bayoudegradeable (1003768) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415500)

well done :)

well, ain't that sumethin' (2, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415334)

Oil in space, never saw that coming. I suppose if we do find life on Titan, it will have to be divided into two armed camps, warring over tribal superstitions no educated sentient should believe in.

That's great if you want hydrocarbons (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415356)

But we don't want hydrocarbons; we want energy. Do you plan to ship oxygen to Titan? Or bring the stuff here and put even more carbon in our atmosphere?

If you're searching the solar system for cheap energy, Mercury is your spot. We should do all our heavy industry, including our supercomputing, in factories buried under the surface or Mercury. Forget sending men to Mars; that's another "Mission Accomplished"-style photo op.

Re:That's great if you want hydrocarbons (1)

vistic (556838) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415554)

Why Mercury? Use the heat or something?

Re:That's great if you want hydrocarbons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22415634)

We should do all our heavy industry, including our supercomputing, in factories buried under the surface or Mercury.
Why?

Just one issue... (1)

l33tlamer (916010) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415358)

Assuming there is a way to get to the Hydrocarbons, wouldn't burning it on Earth still be idiotic given the effect of the Greenhouse gases it would produce?

Re:Just one issue... (1)

EonBlueApocalypse (1029220) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415534)

Yeah, but theres always Mars.

Thank you (4, Insightful)

Max Littlemore (1001285) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415544)

I was reading through all of the crap about how much energy it would take to go and get the hydrocarbons, how our technology isn't quite efficient enough yet, etc, etc, and just hoping that someone on this site would be intelligent enough to realise that, given the problem we already have releasing our own carbon stores into the atmosphere, what kind of absolute stupidity would lead anyone to deliberately import carbon from elsewhere?

I suppose that burning it in orbit and beaming power back to Earth could work, providing we could find a good source of oxygen, but then would that cost less than setting up orbital solar plants?

So in general my reaction to this story is "Wow, Titan's got hydrocarbons - wtf does that have to do terrestrial energy consumption?"

The sad thing? (1)

tubapro12 (896596) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415364)

If this holds true after more analysis, I think that moon just became are next target. After all, all we really need to establish a real space age is an obvious market opportunity.

This one, if capitalized on, would be one that could only lead to hurting the Earth.

Going a little off-topic sci-fi here, I'd like to see if we could take the excess CO2 from Earth and put it on Mars to develop a thicker atmosphere.

Related headline in Titan Daily Times: (4, Funny)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415410)

Chemical Energy Bonanza: Remote sensors indicate that inner planet "Earth" has hundreds of times more oxygen gas than all known reserves here on Titan.

Is that supposed to be our out? (1)

Whatanut (203397) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415418)

I'm not sure what point that has. At the rate we're going we'll have the technology to harvest that energy roughly the same time we....

Ok... we'll have like 9 other solutions before then. I'm sure there are all sorts of energy rich resources out there in our solar backyard. We're not likely to get a reliable way to harvest them prior to finding alternates in our australian (pick your favorite earth bound location here!!) backyard.

Not saying we shouldn't be thinking about it. But it's not exactly anything worth writing home about at this point.

Re:Is that supposed to be our out? (1)

x2A (858210) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415616)

Yeah you're right. They should hide information about hydrocarbon reserves on titan until we can use them. Fancy sending probes out to planets then reporting back what they find! They really haven't thought this through, have they?

more data needed (1)

daniel23 (605413) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415464)


but do they have a leader (and former compliece) to hunt down and hang? And are there any relics from the time that place was the cradle of civilization to rob from the museums and sell at the grey market? It will take at least one "yes" to form a coalition of the willing

mmm (1)

liquidf (1146307) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415486)

mmm...the land of choco...er, uh, hydrocarbons... /homer

Oh! The Humanity! (1)

Anemomaniac (1239142) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415490)

So how long until Exxon start hauling this stuff back here? And how long after that until one of their drunk skippers crashes a billion or so tons of liquid hydrocarbons into Alaska? NB: I find it hilarious that the ad running alongside this article in my browser is from Chevron :-D

Space Dictionary 2008 2nd Edition (Revised) (1)

layer3switch (783864) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415494)

E.T = Extra-Terrorist

And there you have it... (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415496)

The *REAL* reason for space exploration. Never mind the bragging rights for planting silly flags on the moon, or trying to figure out how the planets were formed, or searching for extraterrestrial signs of life... NO, goddamnit, we need to go to space to save the big auto industry.

On a lighter note, DeBeers has already filed mineral rights claims on all non-gaseous planets. Exxon's space programs is getting ready to launch the 'FuckChavez' space probe, and Saturn is gearing up the ad machine while Nissan's marketing department is trying to get a new space-age logo for their truck line. Russia is preparing to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the USA's Titan oil fields to protect earth based business interests and CNN is quoting Rudy G as saying "If we had had that on 9/11, the terrorists would never have attacked MY New York."

Seriously, what we need is not more hydrocarbons. We need clean fuel, and renewable clean fuel at that.

There are 500 or more better reasons to be in space and exploring it... feeding your SUV isn't one of them.

Pollute Earth beyond what we ever imagined ! (1)

vistic (556838) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415532)

So we take TONS AND TONS of these hydrocarbons back to Earth, where we burn it all! TONS AND TONS of pollution from hydrocarbons from outer space in our atmosphere! And if we deplete Titan, we can find more planets/moons/asteroids to tap, and bring it all back to Earth to burn.

Why, eventually Earth can just be an ocean of muck !

how did organic material get on titan? (1)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415548)

Don't you need life to have organic material in order to have hydrocarbons?

Where's your god now?

Re:how did organic material get on titan? (1)

milsoRgen (1016505) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415610)

Nope you can get hydrocarbons from non organic sources.

Re:how did organic material get on titan? (1)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415626)

why did the headline say "organic" ?

Re:how did organic material get on titan? (1)

thrillseeker (518224) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415706)

You must be new here ...

You know you're watching too much pr0n if .. (2, Funny)

s74ng3r (963541) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415550)

If you read that as -- Titanic organ on earth surpass oil reserves!

Non-smoking planet (4, Funny)

chord.wav (599850) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415590)

The hydrocarbons rain from the sky
Titan, the first non-smoking planet. At least on rainy days.

most of you jokers (1)

WormholeFiend (674934) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415608)

have got it all backwards... sending space tankers to Titan is so inefficient! We should focus our efforts on exporting all our gas-guzzling vehicles over there instead...

Finally * all the gasoline I could ever want * (2, Insightful)

burtosis (1124179) | more than 6 years ago | (#22415676)

But where am I going to get enough oxygen to burn it all?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...