I totally get it, the way in which these objects manoeuvre may suggest a high capacity, portable power supply. And this may in turn let us generate lots of ener

I totally get it, the way in which these objects manoeuvre may suggest a high capacity, portable power supply. And this may in turn let us generate lots of energy, which may also be cheap. However, say all these suppositions are true, that there is a technology in existence now that can solve our energy generation and environmental difficulties. Someone will rightly ask whether making that technology public, and hence available, to near-peer militaries would be worth the risk of it being turned against us. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but that's the assessment that may happen. Our military are very risk adverse, and very twitchy when it comes to credible foreign military threats - see the missile gap in the 60's when we had 10x the Soviet capability but still felt vulnerable. Unlike the UK government in the 50's who actually gave jet engine designs to the Soviets that were used against them, our military and government would by nature play that particular clean-limitless energy card very close to our chest. Think what would happen to those tin-pot dictatorships that are propped up by oil sales. Their revenue streams would collapse immediately, and they themselves would undoubtedly be swept away in the aftermath, potentially to the detriment of our foreign policy aims. That's not even thinking about the impact on the markets when the big oil and gas suppliers are put out of business overnight. I'm not arguing against releasing this technology, if it's within our purvue to do so, but to think long and hard before doing it.