Wow, that's not a hostile or biased article at all.

"Republicans will hate it because it's green." - Actually, Republicans hate most green technologies because they are notoriously expensive, incredibly inefficient, and few of them are actually "green" at all. We rarely have a problem with any of the technology itself.

Also, it's not necessarily that green of a technology. Hydrocarbons produce Carbon Dioxide and Water Vapor when burned. If these emissions are not contained, they'll leak back into the atmosphere. And what atmospheric components are most responsible for the greenhouse effect? Water vapor and Carbon Dioxide. Although this is only a problem if you actually think global warming is a problem. Which I don't.

There is also, again, the efficiency question. Everyone who loves green technologies loves ethanol, yet converting corn to ethanol uses more energy than the resulting ethanol nets us. You can convert seawater to fuel. Fantastic, but what is it going to cost? Not in terms of dollars, but in terms of energy. How much oil do you need to burn to burn in order to convert each gallon of seawater into the corresponding fuel amounts, and how much would you get out of it? Then, once you have gotten enough, does the power it supplies produce enough to enable you to extract and convert a greater quantity of water to fuel?

It's certainly an interesting technology, but we'll have to wait to see if it's viable.