[ExI] Nukes was less expensive energy

[Keith Henson]

On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 11:31 PM,  Dennis May <dennislmay at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
> Keith Henson wrote:
> ?
> "But without selling power to earth, I don't see space being
> industrialized this side of the singularity at all."
>
> I see automated and remote mining and manufacturing
> ahead of human presence as the way to get space?
> industrialization done on the cheap.? A few high value
> products and materials would be worth sending back
> to Earth.

I have given decades of thought to this problem.  In the relatively
long run and following a trillion dollar a year power satellite
construction business, I can see mining and maybe manufacturing from
that mining to support the power satellite business.  The Mond process
is particularly useful in sorting out nickel-iron objects.  But the
plant size needed to make it economical is up in the 50,000 ton range,
and while automation is useful, it's also going to need some hundreds
of people to keep it running.

But perhaps you have ideas I missed.  Can you be specific about what
could be mined or manufactured in space and sent back to earth at a
profit?  I would also be very interested in your estimates of the mass
budget and the capital required.

Keith

PS.  I see no reply to the question of manufacturing the equipment
needed for 1000 GW scale reactors per year.




> Dennis May
>
> From: Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com>
> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 5:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Nukes was less expensive energy
>
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 5:00 AM,? Dennis May <dennislmay at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> snip (mostly agree)
>
>> The sheer energy density of nuclear power means
>> it dwarfs all other options.
>
> Discounting the cost of fuel to zero, the relevant number is kg/kW.
> The pressure vessel alone for a 1 GW plant is about 2000 tonnes.? Fuel
> assemblies, steam generators, pumps, turbines and generators run this
> up by a factor of 5-10.? That's 10-20 kg/kW and I may be on the low
> side.? You may be able to put a better number on it as well as an
> estimate for the cents per kWh they will produce.
>
> ? Much of the time
>> delay for implementation of nuclear power
>> plants can be reduced by going to standardized
>> designs.
>
> So far that doesn't seem to have happened.? Fukushima didn't help either.
>
> At $5,000 to $8,000 per kw, the power cost is going to range up to 10
> cents per kWh based on capital cost alone.
>
>> As far as big solar projects go - I see them as
>> being of interest in industrializing space
>> not moving space nuclear energy [sun] to
>> the Earth when there are plenty of Earth
>> based nuclear energy possibilities with much
>> less capital risk.
>
> Perhaps you are right.? But without selling power to earth, I don't
> see space being industrialized this side of the singularity at all.
>
> There is an awful front end cost to get the cost of transport down,
> but if it can get down to where it is no more than a third of the cost
> per kW of capacity, then we are talking power cost based on $1600/kW
> or less.
>
> And construction times measured in weeks.
>
> If we can't get SBSP cost down in this range, then you really should
> start thinking about what it would take to build and fuel 1000 new
> reactors a year.
>
> This might interest some people here:
>
> http://spacefellowship.com/news/art26681/nasa-announces-two-game-changing-space-technology-projects.html
>
> There is serious work starting on beamed energy propulsion.
>
> Keith
>
>> ?
>> Dennis May
>>
>> From: Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com>
>> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 5:46 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ExI] Nukes was less expensive energy
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:06 PM,? Dennis May <dennislmay at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The projections of what will happen economically
>>> without massive nuclear energy development is
>>> not pretty.? Even if that effort began immediately
>>> it is not clear it could happen fast enough.
>>
>> The length of time it takes to build nuclear plants is a big reason to
>> look at other approaches.? I am not at all sure even what is the best
>> approach or mix of approaches to get really inexpensive energy.? I can
>> state that it need to be down in the 1-2 cents per kWh.? That's $800
>> to $1600 per kW based on return of capital in ten years and it needs
>> to scale to 15-20 TW over 20 years.
>>
>> That's building around a 1000 1 GW reactors per year.
>>
>> I have not looked into this in detail.? I have looked into SBSP and
>> StratoSolar and they look possible.? Perhaps you know about reactors?
>>
>> It seems better to me at this stage to state what is needed in broad
>> terms rather than being too specific about how to accomplish the task.
>>
>> Keith
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110917/2e667a82/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 9
>> Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 21:53:52 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: john clark <jonkc at bellsouth.net>
>> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>> Subject: Re: [ExI] A Nobel laureate and climate change.
>> Message-ID:
>> ? ? ? ?<1316321632.46095.YahooMailClassic at web82906.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> ?BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Well, the southern USA states have had their worst wildfire season
>> ever and Texas is still burning. I guess the message will get through eventually. But I suppose that's just a little local fluctuation in temperature?"
>> So let's see, if there's a very bad blizzard in the winter, as there was just a few months ago, it would be foolish to think that had anything to do with long term global climate change; but if there is a heat wave in the summer that proves the entire planet is getting hotter and is facing disaster.
>>
>> "If a US billionaire wanted to produce a new product his first thought would be to get quotes from Chinese factories."
>>
>> Correct, and they would do that because it would be cheaper to operate a plant in China than in the USA.
>>
>> "That's why the US people are facing poverty and living off food stamps."
>>
>> So if workers in the USA are unwilling to work for a wage because they think it's too small even though they are "facing poverty" but Chinese workers are willing to do so then it follows logically that the Chinese workers must be even poorer than the poverty facing workers in the USA.
>>
>> "The rich are China's friends."
>>
>> Right, or to put it another way, the rich are friends of the poorest of the poor.
>>
>> ? John K Clark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ?
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110917/fe97d18e/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 10
>> Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 22:45:27 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Dennis May <dennislmay at yahoo.com>
>> To: "extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>> Subject: [ExI] Quantum Computing Discussion Groups?
>> Message-ID:
>> ? ? ? ?<1316324727.90345.YahooMailNeo at web112102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> Anyone have a recommendation for a group to listen in on
>> discussions of quantum computing?? Most I have been
>> able to locate are the same as dead.
>> ?
>> Dennis May
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110917/07674165/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 11
>> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:36:49 +0100
>> From: BillK <pharos at gmail.com>
>> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>> Subject: Re: [ExI] A Nobel laureate and climate change
>> Message-ID:
>> ? ? ? ?<CAL_armivejytEu63v+YgfFqwq+e+++_aRwE01dceoKOanBZjsg at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>
>> 2011/9/17 kellycoinguy wrote:
>>> Bill.. If the rich want to produce spatulas or vacuums.. Then yes they go to
>>> China to get them built... But if they want true innovation, rather that
>>> rote duplication of stuff that has already been done, then there is still no
>>> place to beat the USA.
>>>
>>> A big part of successful innovation is venture capital. China's government
>>> funds some research.. But it is a drop in the bucket compared to the US
>>> private investment in true innovation.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Your first comment agrees that production facilities are cheaper and
>> more productive in China. So more US innovation won't create much
>> employment in the US.
>>
>> The financial press has noted that some (many?) US companies are not
>> bringing new products to market because in the current economic
>> depression consumer demand has collapsed. The depressed market doesn't
>> want innovation. The US needs jobs first, then people will have money
>> to spend.
>>
>> There is much concern that US innovation is falling behind other
>> countries. Even Obama has commented on this. A recent report is here:
>> <http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2011/08_innovation_greenstone_looney.aspx>
>>
>> The pace of US innovation has slowed since the 1970s. Mainly because
>> government funded research has halved. Basic research is funded by
>> government. (Barcodes, fiber optics, MRI machines and GPS technology
>> are just a few of the innovations that came out of government-funded
>> basic research).
>> Venture capital funds the development of new trinkets for individual
>> firms to manufacture in China and sell in the US and make a profit.
>> And they need consumers willing and able to buy their trinkets.
>>
>>
>> BillK
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>
>>
>> End of extropy-chat Digest, Vol 96, Issue 26
>> ********************************************
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110918/7ba78b3a/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 17:06:05 -0700
> From: Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com>
> To: Dennis May <dennislmay at yahoo.com>,  ExI chat list
>        <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Unions
> Message-ID:
>        <CAHUTwkP39d4gbc5Ww1BiSS+4TBpfk7V7FB-unpjggPaHFQJTHw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Dennis,
>
> You seem to be edging your way into a political discussion slash
> confrontation.  I've noticed a couple of comments aimed at lefties.
>
> Let me advise against it.  Creates flamage.  Wastes time.
>
> Also we have a few lefties on the list.  None are pushovers.
>
> If you have a political or economic point to make, best to stick with
> the facts of the particular case so that analysis/discussion can be
> fact-based rather than ideology/partisanship based.
>
> Just a suggestion.
>
> Welcome to the list.
>
> Best, Jeff Davis
>
>              "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
>                                         Ray Charles
>
> 2011/9/18 Dennis May <dennislmay at yahoo.com>:
>> Unions can represent one more form of uncertainty when
>> making economic calculations.? In some companies and
>> industries unions reduce uncertainty because the company
>> now has one face to deal with instead of a large number
>> of individuals.? This?advantage?generally exists in lower
>> pay jobs in high turn over locations and industries.? If an
>> employee doesn't get satisfaction it falls on the union.
>>
>> For the majority of industries the uncertainty created by
>> unions raises the cost of operation and is sometimes
>> enough to drive them out of the state or out of certain
>> locations.
>>
>> There are a number of unpleasant facts and sometimes
>> risk in?dealing with unions.? Violence, property destruction,
>> work disruptions, organized crime, political interference,
>> political payoffs to Democrats, and collaboration with
>> seedy groups.
>>
>> If I were to locate a new company I would only
>> consider right to work states.
>>
>> Dennis May
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:13:56 -0700
> From: "spike" <spike66 at att.net>
> To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Unions
> Message-ID: <002401cc7669$686adfe0$39409fa0$@att.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>>... On Behalf Of Jeff Davis
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Unions
>
>>...Dennis, You seem to be edging your way into a political discussion slash
> confrontation...
>
> Apologies Jeff, I started it with my ridicule of the Solyndra deal.  Agreed,
> no need to go there now.
>
>>...Welcome to the list.  Best, Jeff Davis
>
> Indeed so, Dennis.  Welcome, and do tell us something about Dennis if you
> wish.
>
> spike
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 19:45:03 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Dennis May <dennislmay at yahoo.com>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Unions
> Message-ID:
>        <1316400303.74824.YahooMailNeo at web112104.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> My background:
> ?
> Physics, engineering physics, engineering
> Military R&D
> Interest in QM and a variety of technology subjects
> ?
> Dan Ust suggested I join Exi
> ?
> Dennis
>
> From: spike <spike66 at att.net>
> To: 'ExI chat list' <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 8:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Unions
>
>>... On Behalf Of Jeff Davis
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Unions
>
>>...Dennis, You seem to be edging your way into a political discussion slash
> confrontation...
>
> Apologies Jeff, I started it with my ridicule of the Solyndra deal.? Agreed,
> no need to go there now.
>
>>...Welcome to the list.? Best, Jeff Davis
>
> Indeed so, Dennis.? Welcome, and do tell us something about Dennis if you
> wish.
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110918/dbe27834/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:11:48 -0700
> From: "Amara D. Angelica" <amara at kurzweilai.net>
> To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: [ExI] Automated black-box-based system design of unsupervised
>        hyperintelligent learning systems
> Message-ID: <02a501cc7682$41226160$c3672420$@net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Does anyone know of a system for automated black-box-based system design of
> unsupervised intelligent hyperintelligent learning systems?
>
>
>
> Imagine a human as an alien spacecraft for which there is no information, so
> engineers must use black-box analysis to reverse-engineer its design and
> functions. Now imagine that human with the most advanced
> self-tracking/monitoring systems imaginable, combined with instrumentation
> for monitoring all of the imaginable external physical phenomena -- light,
> sound, speech-to-text,  videos being watched, etc., and other people, all
> recorded in multi-cam HD video and analyzed in real time (motion capture,
> object detection, movement detection, etc.). Further imagine that this
> system could systematically modify the environment (light, sound, etc.)
> while monitoring the human's responses and that of other people and the real
> world. The system would be compiling a massive realtime multi-yettabyte
> database while running realtime testing routines in a bank of
> supercomputers.
>
>
>
> Now how long do you think it would take such a system to reverse-engineer
> human intelligence and function and pass a more sophisticated version of the
> Turing test based on interacting with humans in RT/RL (real time/real life),
> initially at say, fly level, then cat level, then working up to human genius
> level and passing it, outputting advanced versions of itself.
>
>
>
> And is anyone developing something like this, or do I have to take off a few
> days and develop it myself? OK, a few centuries.... I haven't found anything
> on this except for Anders Sandberg's highly imaginative "Think Before
> Asking,"  <http://eclipsephase.com/downloads/ThinkBeforeAsking.pdf>
> http://eclipsephase.com/downloads/ThinkBeforeAsking.pdf, which touches on
> some aspects of this.
>
>
>
> All ideas, especially skeptical ones (so I don't waste time on blind alleys)
> would be greatly appreciated.
>
>
>
> Yes, this is a totally insane idea, but is it insane enough?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110918/338ec0a3/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:23:36 +0200
> From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
> To: Dennis May <dennislmay at yahoo.com>,  ExI chat list
>        <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] A Nobel laureate and climate change
> Message-ID: <20110919062336.GH25711 at leitl.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
> You're top-posting and not trimming your replies (message
> unchanged below).
>
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 01:30:32PM -0700, Dennis May wrote:
>> Every cent redistributed from productive enterprises into
>> "green" energy further damages the economy.? The numbers
>> don't add up for solar or wind except in niche applications.
>> More and more government investment into losing enterprises
>> with the money being pocketed by political patrons isn't
>> going to change the simple physics and economics that solar
>> and wind will never amount to much.? If Germany wants to
>> go broke like Spain chasing green energy there is no reason
>> to follow their foolish path.
>> ?
>> Once you move outside of the U235 path into other
>> nuclear energies there is enough to power civilization
>> until well after the sun itself becomes a problem.
>> ?
>> Dennis May
>>
>> From: BillK <pharos at gmail.com>
>> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2011 2:03 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ExI] A Nobel laureate and climate change
>>
>> 2011/9/18 john clark wrote:
>> > And that's why wind farms and solar panel companies don't need huge subsidies. Oh wait they do.
>> > Tax benefits are the only reason wind farms exist and Solyndra just went under taking over half a
>> > billion dollars of taxpayers money with it; they found out that selling solar panels for half of what it
>> > cost to make them was not a good business model. Maybe we'll need more than moonbeams and
>> > lollipops to power the world economy after all. Maybe its time to get serious.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Solyndra failed, as you say, because they didn't reduce production
>> costs like other solar companies were doing.
>> See:
>> <http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/solyndra-solar-failed-poor-cost-structure-not-china>
>>
>> But solar power is a new booming industry. There are always lots of
>> failures at the start of a new industry. (Remember all the failed
>> Internet startups?).? The government made a failed investment in the
>> case of Solyndra, but other investments are doing nicely.? Nobody can
>> pick winners every time. Even venture funds make mistakes sometimes.
>> ;)
>>
>> I think all western governments decided to encourage investments in
>> renewable energy industries because private industry won't invest
>> until they see a near-term profit. Governments need renewable energy
>> in the near future and they don't want to wait until fuel is $20 USD
>> per gallon.
>>
>> Germany (where Eugen is) is doing very nicely in the renewable energy races.
>>
>>
>> BillK
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
> --
> Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
> ______________________________________________________________
> ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
> 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:31:04 +0200
> From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> Subject: Re: [ExI] A Nobel laureate and climate change
> Message-ID: <20110919063104.GJ25711 at leitl.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 04:49:00PM -0400, Mr Jones wrote:
>> The problem summed up...We see the world as something we've inherited from
>> our ancestors, rather than something we've borrowed from our children.  If
>> you fail to plan, you plan to fail.  We're failing.
>
> We don't have to plan. You forgot THE SINGULARITY! Have faith, brothers.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
> End of extropy-chat Digest, Vol 96, Issue 28
> ********************************************
>