SPS vs. solar/wind/hydrogen debate (Long Post)

In article ,
(Gary Heidenreich) wrote:

Where do the orbital resources come from if not the moon?

Well, NEAs. But I agree that the Moon is more likely.

If from the moon, why not use them where they are found?

I see that proposal discussed now and then, but I don't see how it makes
as much sense. The Moon is not at fixed position in the sky, nor does
any point on it receive continuous sunlight, or sunlight from a fixed
direction. All of those problems are avoided (almost completely) by a
satellite in GEO. And it doesn't strike me as substantially harder to
build it there than to build it on the lunar surface.

A detailed reference that compares all forms of terrestial and space
power (oil, gas, coal, nuclear, solar, wind, biomass, etc. and SPS,
and LSP (lunar solar power) can be found in the book "Innovative
energy solutions to CO2 Stabilization," 2002, Ch 9 pp 345-410 by D.R.
Criswell

Thank you for the reference, I'll add that to my list. ...Er, I'm
embarassed to say that I can't find this. Would you have an ISBN number?

I would like to see an independent peer review of the technical and
cost extimates from this research, which is the result of twenty-five
years of effort. I am thinking of a ~$5-$10 million 1-2 year study.

Well I certainly would love to see that too.

- Joe

,------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Joseph J. Strout Check out the Mac Web Directory: |
| http://www.macwebdir.com |
`------------------------------------------------------------------'