[ExI] EP and Peak oil.
hkeithhenson at gmail.com
Fri Apr 4 14:20:03 UTC 2008
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:51 PM, Bryan Bishop <kanzure at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 03 April 2008, Brent Neal wrote:
> > On 3 Apr, 2008, at 0:26, John K Clark wrote:
> > > The trouble with power satellites is it could take a couple of
> > > trillion dollars just to build a prototype and then you could learn
> > > for sure that the idea just isn't going to work
> > Citations, please? :P
> I second this motion. Last month I visited UT Austin, they have a lab
> with kids my age launching rockets and mini satellites on the cehap
> (and they are dead broke); adding in power-sat stuff seems more like a
> matter of knowledge than 'trillions of dollars'.
It's not a small project, my guess is on a par with going to the moon
the first time. That puts it in the high hundreds of billions due to
the order of magnitude inflation since those days.
I don't even know which of the three currently proposed transport
methods will work out. The space elevator has the best return on
energy, but it takes a massive orbital cleanup project plus developing
strong enough nanotube fibers and ways to recover from a cut cable.
Since the output is very low cost energy that can be fed back into the
launch mechanism, requiring a lot of launch energy only delays the
point at which the project starts paying for itself by a few months.
More information about the extropy-chat