Let's not forget Rudy's suggestion:
clean energy to Earth may be the closest thing >to 'replicators' any of
us will see in our lifetime.
>
>I have proposed using the energy at sea, to synthesize ethanol as a
fuel, rather than to land based stations. I think >the public will see
the land based units as an externsion of the appliance in their kitchen
and fear them. Ethanol is >a safe, stable form of hydrogen that be
stored and transported safely, fits into the existing infrastructure and
can >>used in many applications.
>
>Keep in touch
>
>Rudy Behrens
Two points on ethanol (or other hydrogen storage media):
1) Making a sizable hydrogen economy work seems to lead to fuel cells
and fuel cells need platinum for catalysis.
2) There are TONS of platinum in NEOs, as well as other "accessible"
space resources.
How small a microbot miner can we reasonably expect to create?
Are "micro missions" cheap enough to do without government launchers and
public funding?
Is the financial return from platinum and other rare metals attractive
enough?
How best to send platinum from the mine to Earth?
Colin Keizer
Hello
expensive, but they are cheaper than the equivalent land lines, microwave
towers or submarine cables that would be needed to replace them. So they are
a viable industry in space right now.
We need to define a justifiable need for a manned presence. Once that is
done, the rest follows.
Rudy Behrens
John Lewis' book, Mining the Sky, gives a good review of that subject,
mining the sky. Energy seems like the only possibility for profits via
selling something on Earth from space in the near future. So, I am for
exploring that option, but still I wonder if this import-kind-of thinking
misses the mark.
The value of the Americas was not primarily what could be taken to Europe
and sold, but what we Americans now have here. Sometimes it is still called
the New World. We can have the same in Space. With global warming and
growing populations, humans need new habitats which offer the possibility of
industrial lifestyles. A third of the Earth's population live under
extremely deprived conditions, and if they consumed energy and materials at
the same rate that those of us with computers do the environments of Earth
would be in much worse shape. And I think it is going there. In space
there can be thousands, even millions, or billions, of new worlds. And the
people on such multiple worlds would not all die from one large asteroid
impact with Earth. What is the economic value of our species surviving?
The Moon is a logical outpost for sending energy to Earth via microwaves,
and for building materials for space infrastructure as outlined by G. K.
O'Neill in the 1970's. See The High Frontier, G. K. O'Neill, for example.
The Moon is a place to start. There may be others, but humans could live in
"mining towns" on the Moon, and on orbiting construction habitats. Tourism
now can help publicize those possibilities, maybe even help finance the
infrastructure. A Lunar Las Vegas, with golf courses, would be great! Of
course, all of the steps to achieve these exterrestrial outposts are not
clear, but neither were the details clear for the terrestrial colonization
efforts.
Although we should examine the history of colonization on Earth to see if
there are lessons that apply to space, I am skeptical and suspect few will.
Too many things, communications and transportation technologies, capital
markets, for examples, are just too different.
I hope these comments will be of interest. Sincerely, Jay Huebner
John Lewis' book, Mining the Sky, gives a good review of that subject,
mining the sky. Energy seems like the only possibility for profits via
selling something on Earth from space in the near future. So, I am for
exploring that option, but still I wonder if this import-kind-of thinking
misses the mark.
The value of the Americas was not primarily what could be taken to Europe
and sold, but what we Americans now have here. While I would agree that the Americaneconomy is not now primarily known for tea and beaver pelts, these exports did help get the process started. At square one, we have to think in terms of exports to Earth simply because at square one every investor in existence lives on Earth. In the same fashion, I still hope that SPS will be the industry to get High Frontier started. But 100 years from the start, I no longer expect SPS to be the chief product of the space economy. I expect it to be habitats for sale to immigrants from Earth. More along the lines of what you're talking I'm skeptical of scenarios involving the importation of raw materials to Earth (platinum group metals I may allow as an outside possibility). That leaves data and energy as two massless exports which can be beamed to Earth. Data transmission is currently a profitable business, but doesn't require large masses in space. I've more recently begun to accept that space tourism might be a plausible way of starting the process, since it can begin in a far more incremental fashion than SPS.
Regards,
Hello
like installing high resolution camers in space and having people experience
it with VR gear? For a fee, of course. I confess I don't know much about it
myself.
Might be a baby step.
There are several proposals for this.
e.g. www.transorbital.net amongst others.
pokchoy@... wrote: Hello
Just a thought....... Has anyone considered virtual tourism before? Something
like installing high resolution camers in space and having people experience
it with VR gear? For a fee, of course. I confess I don't know much about it
myself.
Might be a baby step.
structure
>
Hello
> Just a thought....... Has anyone considered virtual tourism before?
Something
> like installing high resolution camers in space and having people
experience
> it with VR gear? For a fee, of course. I confess I don't know much about
it
> myself.
>
That's exactly what the guys at LunaCorp (lunacorp.com) are intending to do.
They plan to land a robotic rover on the Moon and sell VR time for people
"embodying" the thing from Earth.
Lucio Coelho
Hi,
I like the dialog going on. Baby steps, you bet. I'd rather add a
log to the fire of thought going on, but some folks brought up a reality
check too.
I'd like to believe that any importation of precise metals or other
resources would be welcomed with open arms. There are investors and
others watching the market and any additional in flow of resources will
drive their market and prices down.
I saw it happen while touring a gold mine in Parks, UT. There is
still gold there, but as long as gold prices remain below $25 it is not
feasible at this time to continue to mine it. Other locations do large
scale open pit mining and they are still able to turn a profit at such a
low price.
We need to be aware of those who will make more money keeping things
the way they are. Anybody seen any positive signs that power folks are
eager to get into the SPS program lately? Anybody want to guess why our
government isn't pushing to get into the SPS business?
Ah, too many negative thoughts. I do truly appreciate your updates
and references.
Steve Ivens