can we harvest gases from other planets if we run out of fossilfuels

[splooge gook]

i dunno i'm asking you

[splooge gook]

oh but that would require more fossil fuels in the firstplace wouldn't it lol

[Infinityshock]

i dunno i'm asking you

If we have the technology to do that in a cost effective manner we'd have the technology to use a better power source

[splooge gook]

i dunno can concentrated solar energy be used to fuel rocketships? this would allocate the strength of solar surfers which would continuously bring us back natural gas in compressed containers whic is made for many things. just useitmorelinerally basically. liberalinthe good sense here

[splooge gook]

i dunno i'm asking you

If we have the technology to do that in a cost effective manner we'd have the technology to use a better power source

my answer > your answer

[Slave of the Beast]

Yes, the method is quite practical.

[Rook]

 Hopefully we will come up with better technologies to harness energy variants that we currently have, yet cant efficiently make available. Fossil Fuels are seemingly the only practical energy source as its currently the only one we can sufficiently supply ourselves with, and most of our transportation technology is focused around it singularly anyways. I'm not a huge fossil fuels fan.. I wish we could be done away with coal and oil. Honestly, if was a means to efficiently siphon energy, I would assume some practical way of harnessing the suns energy would be... well, the most practical. It does provide the most energy of any object in our relative vicinity.. The answer will probably lie in mankind's ability to create new elements that exhibit the qualities for better energy storage.. Honestly, I have no real grasp on energy outside of how an 2 and 4 stroke engine work, how electricity works, and the general overview of how our basic batteries work.. lithium ion technology, solar power, crystal batteries, and the like are all subjects I could use a good brushing up on.. I am digging this thread though, and nice vid find SOTB.

[Infinityshock]

i dunno i'm asking you

If we have the technology to do that in a cost effective manner we'd have the technology to use a better power source

my answer > your answer

Yout answer doesnt account for using solar as a power source instead of a chemical fuel.  If solar was effective enough methane wouldn't be needed

[Infinityshock]

Hopefully we will come up with better technologies to harness energy variants that we currently have, yet cant efficiently make available. Fossil Fuels are seemingly the only practical energy source as its currently the only one we can sufficiently supply ourselves with, and most of our transportation technology is focused around it singularly anyways. I'm not a huge fossil fuels fan.. I wish we could be done away with coal and oil. Honestly, if was a means to efficiently siphon energy, I would assume some practical way of harnessing the suns energy would be... well, the most practical. It does provide the most energy of any object in our relative vicinity.. The answer will probably lie in mankind's ability to create new elements that exhibit the qualities for better energy storage.. Honestly, I have no real grasp on energy outside of how an 2 and 4 stroke engine work, how electricity works, and the general overview of how our basic batteries work.. lithium ion technology, solar power, crystal batteries, and the like are all subjects I could use a good brushing up on.. I am digging this thread though, and nice vid find SOTB.

He-3 as a fuel is the closest in potential and even that is decades away from any potential application.  Fossil fuels will never be an ideal power source

[Slave of the Beast]

There is enough stored energy in the world's oceans in the form of unfused hydrogen nuclei to re-melt the Earth's crust several times over. Bugger trying to fly to the Moon or Jupiter for gas, or Atlantis for a ZPM, figure out how to build a viable hydrogen-fusion reactor on Earth first.

[Prometheus]

The problem with fusion is that we'll probably need Helium 3 to get that working in our lifetimes, which means mining it from the moon. This is because deuterium-tritium fusion tends to burn out the containment magnets with high energy neutrons.

Until we have better battery technology, transportation is going to have to run on chemical fuel (not necessarily fossil fuel in origin) due to the energy density. Of course, if more of our shipping was done via rail, it wouldn't be overly difficult to rig a way to supply power.

The biggest problem is that people are total pussies about nuclear. Our electricity needs would be set except for that the public still thinks that nuclear plants glow in the dark (you catch more radiation from the exhaust on a coal plant), and that the nuclear industry is too cheap to reprocess their waste, which would all but eliminate the nuclear waste problem.

Of course, wind/solar are also good, because they will never run out and reduce the amount of consumables needed, as well as grid load, if managed properly.

As to the original post: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. That's good. Tell me another one.

[HampTheToker]

Two words...prohibitively expensive.

Only the richest of the rich would be able to afford the price tag on gas from Uranus.

[HampTheToker]

Ugh delete

[HampTheToker]

Bugger trying to fly to the Moon or Jupiter for gas, or Atlantis for a ZPM...

Spoiler