first post thoughts...

On Jan 08, 2007, at 14:57 UTC, Charles F. Radley wrote:

> The premise of the vision is solar power satelites to provide most of
> Earth' energy.
>
> That basic vision is still good. All it needs is for people to
> realise:
>
> a) SPS is feasible and

A small demonstration unit would go a long way to helping with this.
Something in LEO, so that the transmitter doesn't have to be so huge,
even though this complicates the aiming a bit and means intermittent
power. But the question remains, who would pay for such a
demonstration? It seems like the sort of thing NASA ought to do, but
clearly they're not going to. Groups like SSI and NSS don't have
anywhere near enough money to afford the launch, let along the
hardware, I think. So that leaves either other countries (Japan is a
remote possibility), or hope for an angel like Munsk, Branson, or Allen.

It's also remotely possible that DARPA or DOE could be persuaded to
fund it, but I think the driving force for that would have to come from
within.

> b) the higher cost of SPS is more than offset by:
> - eliminating the balance of trade deficit (no more oil imports),
> - remove the funding source (petrodollars) for a lot of unfriendly
> countries and organizations (hence end the war on terror - greatly
> reduced military spending)
> - eliminate greenhouse gases (and other pollutants)

These all seem like obviously great benefits to me, but it's amazing
how many otherwise intelligent people will argue with any one of them
(or in extreme cases, all three!).

> - eliminate nuclear power

This one was a stumbling block for me for a while. Nuclear power is
actually a great technology, quite safe with modern power plants, and
the waste-disposal issue isn't as big of a problem as most people
believe. But I've recently come to realize that nuclear proliferation
is a real problem. Anybody who can build a power reactor can build a
breeder reactor (producing plutonium) too, and as more nuclear reactors
come online, it's going to be harder and harder to keep terrorists from
building nuclear bombs. This may be reason enough to eschew nuclear
power, at least as long as other options are available.

> - provide technological stimulus to the west

Another good one, though harder to quantify.

Best,
- Joe

Joe Strout -- joe@...