Seriously.

...says the shark!

I would like to point out that NASA considers a quantitative risk assessment to be a +/- order of magnitude tool. So if the actual frequency turns out to be within 70-7000 years, the QRA is as acceptable.

A lot of folks are looking at the details instead of asking the bigger question: where's the open source alternative? Supported by the indie community and users, who provide server capacity. As long as we're talking proprietary business models, companies will try to take every advantage they can. That's the reality of competition.

I was in the pre and post-Katrina aftermath for quite a bit and can assure you that cell networks will instantly fail for voice calls in a widespread emergency. SMS, OTOH, will get through surprisingly often and usually with reasonable speed.

Jury nullification is a myth. The practice became widespread during Prohibition. When it saw a resurgence during the War On Drugs, judges quickly clamped down. It doesn't exist.

The floor of the Gulf of Mexico has numerous chemosynthetic communities that live off methate hydrates, oil seeps, and even pockets of salt saturated water where salt domes are exposed. Oil seeps are prevalent throughout the region. Likely the only reason people noticed this one is they were out there doing research.

I'm a Mechanical Engineer with 30 years experience and for a BSME from a fully accredited major school, my math requirements were only Calculus 1-3 and ODEs (loads of application, of course). In my career I've only used the calculus a few times (e.g. passing the EIT exam). I did do some graphics programming, FEM, etc. in school, but at the end of the day, what maths you needed really depended on the direction of your career. What few bits of software I've written that get used needed just bitwise operations and logic. You don't need much math for that.

Good link and I don't at all disagree, but that's current algae technology vs the bioengineering that is the subject of the OP. And of course the link didn't take into account the energy needed to produce the cells and the algae pipe in the first place. I think if you look at that, there's a heck of a lot of initial energy in making a big PV cell. But if the CalTech cell can be mass produced, with over 80% efficiency, it will be a game changer.

No, biofuels can be the most efficient around if it goes straight from solar to chemical, such as algae in a space efficient layout. Classic silicon solar panels are the most inefficient around.

Energy is a hugely capital intensive sector, and investors rightly expect return on investment. Exxon and Shell spent more money developing natural gas reserves on Sakhalin island than the US spent developing the space shuttle. If BP is expected to pump billions into developing advanced biofuels, I would expect them to protect their patents. Don't forget that BP was the oil company that helped support the radical new solar cells announced last year at CalTech. Protecting a properly granted patent is not technology suppression. And no, I don't work for BP.

Props for trying to educate trolls. If they are retarded, then props for trying to educate the uninformed. Tough work, though.

because they are too inefficient, in energy and materials, for mass use. Multi-person public or private transportation systems will be used and individually owned and operated vehicles bigger than a bicycle will be a thing of the past. At the current rate of population growth, minimal footprint will be rule number 1.