[ExI] Alternate to shrinking people

[Adrian Tymes]

Reading through the study...

Page 15, table 2.2.  Restated on page 18, table 2.3.
DRM 1-A and 1-C are 40 kg payloads; 1-B is 80 kg.

Even ignoring the launch vehicle costs, the recurring
per-launch ground operations costs come to $666,666.67,
$916,666.67, and $791,666.67 respectively.  Per kg, that's
about $17K, $11K, and $20K, respectively.

That is way more than $100/kg - and again, that's ignoring
the launch vehicle costs, though those are on the order
of$1K/kg (and thus need to be addressed to get under
$100/kg).

What kinds of cost savings are you anticipating, that the
NASA study does not reflect?  Granted, simply not using
the traditional overengineer-because-cost-is-no-object
approach could be a huge part of that.

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> Abstract
>
> Space Transportation in an Era of SBSP
>
> Space based solar power can be used to power transport into space at
> remarkably low cost.  Two GW of laser energy beamed down from GEO can
> support a traffic flow of 500,000 tons per year at a cost well under
> $100/kg.  The front-end cost is high, at $10 per watt, $20 B for 2 GW,
> and the cost to lift the first seed laser (500 MW) would be even more,
> $25 B at the Falcon Heavy estimated rate.  The investment in
> propulsion lasers would pay off in a few years lifting power satellite
> parts to GEO.  Diverting only a few percent of power satellite
> construction into additional propulsion lasers leads to a traffic flow
> in the millions of tons and a rate of power satellite construction
> exceeding one TW per year.  Large as the front-end cost is, it makes
> sense both in terms of economic return and as a way to reduce military
> expenditures, i.e., propulsion lasers on this scale reduce or
> eliminate the perceived need to fight wars with emerging nuclear
> powers.  Such a program solves energy and carbon problems in addition
> to providing energy security for all countries.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> My presentation to the Alternative Energy NOW conference (full of
> military people and the head of strategic planning at ExxonMobil) is
> here:
>
> https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bzm7IoVgps00ZWw0eng4TmRSWkdNWFhpZFk2QzNQUQ/edit
>
> A couple of days later NASA released a 698 page study on beamed energy
> propulsion,
>
> http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20120002761_2012003334.pdf
>
> Beamed energy propulsion is going main stream.
>
> With enough cheap energy, recycling everything becomes fairly easy.
>
> We could even make fresh water from sea water and pump it inland a
> thousand miles for crops.
>
> Keith
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat