NASA green lander crashes on takeoff

View Comments (13)

• NASA is not following the script. Natural gas is obtained by fracking which all the greenies are upset about now. Anything that is a cheap efficient energy source and creates jobs is apparently not green. Earth to Hansen...find another fuel.

• So they are trying to tout Natural Gas as the new green rocket fuel? Or in this case liquified natural gas? Next it will be algae based fuel at 50 dollars a gallon, will the stupidity ever end?

• methane/oxygen propulsion interests because it can be synthesized from native Martian material for a return trip home, if we ever decide to send humans there. It reduces the outbound cost, because we wouldn't need to haul the fuel there.

  I stole this all from Zubrin in the 90s

  Otherwise, not understanding why they designate "green". The oxidation of methane produces CO2 (CH4+O2= CO2+H20)

  • it can be synthesized from native Martian material for a return trip home

    Figures a Martian would know that! ;-)

  • It's green because they tell you it's green!

• WOW, So there really is a vehicle that runs on unicorn farts?

  • LOL, I saw this after I made the above post.

  • drb--you stole my line! That's the first thing that popped into my head when I read this---that and "maybe NASA should just stick to Muslim outreach until we get a real president in the oval office"

    • ;)

• Too bad Hansen wasn't piloting it.

• "the methane-and-liquid oxygen powered lander is a total loss."
  METHANE???? THAT'S A TOXIC GREENHOUSE GAS!!!! GREEN????????

  • I know. There's a bit of irony in that, isn't there? Apparently they decided methane was greener than what NASA usually uses. Personally, I want NASA - and the military - to use whatever works best. These greenie assholes have the military experimenting with corn oil in our warships and fighter planes.

    • The next generation of "green" lander will run on eleventy trillion unicorn farts.