[ExI] Space Based Solar Power vs. Nuclear Fission

Lee Corbin lcorbin at rawbw.com
Tue May 20 01:30:29 UTC 2008

Stefano writes

> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 10:53 PM, hkhenson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:
>> It may not be.  If we could build a space elevator, the energy
>> payback time is incredibly short--at least for the energy needed to
>> lift a power sat to GEO.
> Speaken of unproven, or rather non-existing, technologies... :-)

Yes, that's true, however foreseeable and practical and important
and beneficial the space elevator and the powers sats at GEO will be.

> Having said that, needless to say I am absolutely in favour of
> investigating and implementing both satellite- or moon-based solar
> energy and researching the fundamentals that might lead to a space
> elevator.

Right on.

> Speaking of lowest hanging fruits, I do not see such things as very
> rapid-deployment solutions, however. Please note however that I am
> much better informed of the state-of-the art of nuclear fusion.

Nuclear *fusion*???   Speaking of unproven, or rather non-existing
technologies... :-)

Again, what about nuclear *fission*, which has been a proven and
existing technology for some five decades. I could hardly believe
that your sentence ended with the word that it did. 

Keith says that "there isn't time" to build enough fission plants,
though green resistance is collapsing, and we simply don't know
how much time it will take for space elevators and your nuclear
fusion.  Please explain, thanks. You evidently really do know
a lot that I've missed.


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list