Boeing is in a complete state of denial over the price of oil. Airplanes can run on other fuels, made from other energy sources.

Some time ago I developed a cargo insert that allows existing aircraft to run on alternative fuels. The concept of a dual fuel aircraft is very feasible. As a general rule alternative fuels are bulkier and heavier than traditional mineral oil, but are cleaner...and can be made from other energy sources besides geologic oil.

Alcohol and biodiesel are now the two favorites candidates. I developed a version of a cargo insert container (installed in the cargo bay). The secret to this are the inerting gases, which are used to keep oxygen out of the tank. I developed a pumpless design that used an inerting gas to blow the liquid fuel out. Just like a pop bottle with carbon dioxide dissolved, the shaken up gas pressurizes and fills the other tanks. This pumpless design is safer. Pumps and electrical circuits can fail on an aircraft. Plus, inerting gases like argon, nitrogen, or CO2, all have known fire-fighting capabilities. Biodiesel fuels and alcohol fuels are in some ways safer than traditional JP, in that the "window" of combustion is smaller. Alcohol flames you can walk through.

Few know this, but inerting gases (which are cold) can also be injected into the jet engine, adding more trust. The key is not to snuff out the fire, but existing aircraft engines can, with work, be modified to accept dual fuels. The aircraft could take off from alternative fuels, and once at altitude, convert over to traditional jet petroleum, thus making for a clean and green jet. The inerting gases can also be used as a fuel. The expansion of the cold inerting gases give more "mass flow" or more stuff thrown out the back for more thrust.

There is a bonus. The turbines of the jet engines do not "rev" so much and have a lower RPM. The slower rotation speed reduces the chance of the turbine flying out of it's housing. During takeoff is when the turbines rotate the fastest.

As a general rule, something like 10% of all fuel is used on takeoff, another 5% is used in taxi. Alternative fuels are ideal for this phase of flight. If we can make alternative fuels cheaper (and I say safer) it will save the airlines a bundle.

Besides biodiesel/alcohol, the other three alternative fuels often promoted are propane, natural gas, and hydrogen. Hydrogen actually has more BTUs per pound, but takes up four times the volume. It is lighter weight. Boeing actually did design a natural gas 747 for the gas industry. The tanker was supposed to airlift natural gas from Northern Canada. Propane is highly underrated.

The key again to making these fuels safe rests with inerting gases. I have proposed a dual tank, with the cryogenics (H2, NG, propane) surrounded by another high pressure tank with the inerting gases (Ar, N2, CO2). This exterior tank pushes the cryogenic fuel out to the engine, making for a pumpless design. The gases aren't entirely liquid. The gases are stored at the "triple point"...that point where the cyrogenic fuel is liquid, solid, and gas at the same time. Believe it or not General Dyanamics now makes such light weight tanks, capable of storing gases up to 10,000 psi...more than enough pressure to inject into the jet engines. A cargo insert can be designed for existing aircraft.

When an aircraft takes off, the aircraft could use these alternative fuels. By the time the aircraft is at altitude, these fuels are used up, making for a safe cruise and landing, using traditional jet petroleum.

Some nations don't have oil, but do have other energy sources. Bolivia has natural gas. Nepal has huge hydropower sources that could make hydrogen. We can make inerting gases, from electricity...simply taking argon, nitrogen or carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Boeing will tell you the infrastructure requirements for such a fuel cargo insert are huge...but so are the investments for oil-drilling in Alaska.

Boeing can do more to pull the nation off foreign oil...if they only tried.