Heat management, recycling, $, and space ores

From: "Combs, Mike"
To:
Sent: Tera-feira, 21 de Novembro de 2000 18:34
Subject: [spacesettlers] Heat management, recycling, $, and space ores

[snikt]
> As an aside, please know that a tether-powered habitat would pay for it's
> electrical power with a constantly lowering orbit.
>

Yes, indeed I discussed that with Darren in an earlier message. After some
back-of-the-envelope calculation, the conclusion was that, provided that the
habitat is coupled with a much more massive natural body (e.g., an
asteroid), the rate of lowering would be negligible and the habitat could
have an steady energy supply for centuries without dropping itself
somewhere. I think that maybe that is an alternative for habitats associated
with asteroid-like moons around the gas giants.

[snikt]
> I've heard it suggested that animosity toward SPS from this same community
> of physicists (perhaps concerned about possible competition) might account
> for the rough treatment SPS received in the NRC study. I know I sent a
> letter to O'Neill asking him if some of the numbers in the NRC study
weren't
> quite simply wrong. He agreed, referring to the study as "nature faking".
>

"NCR" is another unfamiliar acronym for me... And I'm also not aware of the
study that you're referring to. Would you explain them, please?

[snikt]
> Rgds,
>

Rgds,

> Mike Combs

Lucio Coelho