forests on orbit

http://www.fas.usda.gov/ffpd/Newsroom/2007%20Wood.pdf

The US uses 1 cubic meter of softwood and 0.4 cubic meter of hardwood
per person per year. If the entire world were to use paper and wood
at this rate the world would need 6.6 billion cubic meters of softwood
and 2.7 billion cubic meters of hardwood each year. This is 11x the
annual production of these products in the world today.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/Eco/EEch8_ss6.htm

Forest plantations produce 4 cubic meters of wood product per hectare
per year. That means 2.8 people may be supported per hectare. 280
people per square kilometer. Approximately 1/10th the number of
people supported by an equivalent area of ag satellite.

Clearly, forestry satellites will be built later than ag satellites
since to take advantage of learning curve effects as well as existing
capital in place following an ag build out - to reduce plantation
costs.

I wrote earlier about a collection of 676,000 satellites in a sun
synchronous polar orbit above Earth forming a band 1,000 km to 1,026
km above the Earth made from 1,000 select asteroidal fragments
retrieved from the asteroid belt.

These satellites fly in an orbital plane that is constantly
perpendicular to the sun. Thus the satellites are in constant
sunlight. Each consists of cylinders 1 km in diameter intercepting
0.785 km2 of sunlight - and illuminating 3.140 km2 of cylinder area.
Thus, the cylinder is 1 km tall.

Each of these satellites can support 879 persons in their wood
needs.

The light falls on a shaped conical reflector that has two lobes.
Each lobe reflects incident light across 90 degrees of cylinder
circumference - with constant intensity along the height of the
cylinder. There are two regions of highest intensity - which peaks at
1,000 w/m2 - separated by 180 degrees - so these are two lines on the
cylinder on opposite sides. The intensity falls off along a cosine
curve to zero intensity at plus and minus 45 degrees. from 45 degrees
to 135 degrees and from -45 degrees to -135 degress - the cylinder is
in darkness - simulating night.

To maintain 1 gee force the cylinder rotates once every 44.8342
seconds. The two lobed mirror described above rotates once every
44.8458 seconds. The slight difference in rotation rate means that
the two bright lobes sweep across the cylinder every 24 hours -
simulating the day night cycle of Earth.

With 6.6 billion people a total of 7,508,533 satellites are needed to
supply them all with wood.

At an altitude of 1,026 km above Earth the ag satellite system ends.
Capturing another 1,000 asteroids and operating at 1,186 km altitude
in the same orbit above Earth as the agicultural cylinders - each
asteroid is separated from the others by 47.5 km. These are equipped
with productive capabilities that allow them to produce 7,520
satellites from each of the captured asteroids in a plane extending
downward 160 km.- 47 km wide - 7520 cylinders in all each 1 km in
diameter. A total area of 23.6 million sq km forestry plantations.

A total of 3.44 cubic meters of wood per day is produced by each
satellite - an average weight of 1800 kg per day of wood. A very
small flow rate reflecting the longer grow times of woods. Total flow
for humanity is 13,536,000 metric tons per day for the whole
plantation system.

This may be increased slightly due to the coproduction of consumable
products in a forest setting. Products like mushrooms, nuts and
various fruits may be produced in parallel.

Roughly speaking on a recurring basis, this system requires about 76%
of the flow rate of the ag system described previously. A total of
200 years of production may be supported with this system. About four
harvests of most woods.

Just as the food products may be processed on orbit with telerobotic
labor, so too may the wood products be similarly processed. Furniture
and building components may be produced on orbit and delivered to end
users.

Other fibers include wool and cotton.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/cot...milldemand.pdf

Total fiber demand is about 15 kg and approximately 7 kg is cotton for
the average American. Translating this to the entire Earth means
271,040 metric tons per day - which is but a slight adjustment,
especially when given the short life cycle of cotton and the foodstuff
of sheep.

The transition from ore processing to finished good processing to
fabrication to high intensity agriculture to forestry is nearly a
continuous transition in intensity per unit area

http://www.steeldynamics.com/investo...2010k-2001.pdf

Modern steel producers require about 3 sq km of surface area to
produce 1 million metric tons of steel per year from iron ore.
Factories process 100,000 metric tons of products in the same area per
year. Agricultural systems produce 10,000 metric tons of food
products per year from the same area. Forestry systems produce 1,000
metric tons of wood and fiber products per year from the same area.

Raw materials 1,000,000 metric tons per year per satellite
Finished goods 100,000 metric tons per year per satellite
Agricultural goods 10,000 metric tons per year per satellite
Wood & Fiber 1,000 metric tons per year per satellite
Private Residences 100 metric tons per year per satellite

Number of Satellites

Raw materials 10,000
Finished goods 100,000
Agricultural goods 1,000,000
Wood and Fiber 10,000,000
Private Residences 2,000,000,000

Habitats with daily commutes to Earth and back process approximately
100 metric tons per year - given that each person masses approximately
80 kg with 3.5 people per satellite on average.

Again, as the volume of satellites increase and their use spreads, it
is reasonable to conclude that residential use will expand.

The large 20 fold increase in the number of residences when compared
to the growth in number of satellites needed for other uses suggest
some sort of disconnect. This can easily be remedied by observing
that we have assumed the per capita income of the average American, as
a global standard of consumption. While this represents a massive
increase in the standard of living world wide (11x) it would be naive
to believe this to be an end point in human development. In fact, we
can look at the amount of wood, fibers, metal and so forth, used by
different income groups throughout the world, compared to the surface
area projected for the private residences, and we see that by
increasing per capita income from $45,000 per year (US average) to
$1,000,000 per year - the disconnect disappears as the number of
satellites grow to meet this need.

Raw materials 200,000
Finished goods 2,000,000
Agricultural goods 20,000,000
Wood and Fiber 200,000,000
Private Residences 2,000,000,000

So we build for a 220x increase in consumption, from the global
average today, not the 11x to meet today's US per capita
consumption.

We could of course increase the number of people aboard each satellite
increasing them to 75 people per satellite. This is about 20 hectares
per household. But to maintain a lower mass flow rate requires
visiting the Earth once every 3 weeks or so - which makes the orbiting
community pretty isolated from the Earth.

Of course every satellite will be operated for a profit - so the
numbers will continue to grow until the marginal profits decline below
the returns available from other investment vehicles. In short there
are no arbitrary limits as to when people will use residences, or how
dense they will be an so forth. The only thing this calculation is
intended for here is to determine when MOST people will use MOST of
the off-world assets, what the largest use rate will be, and plan
systems around that.

It seems most reasonable to me, notwithstanding early developments in
the field - i.e. a space hotel, or a lunar golf community, etc., that
when most people leave Earth they will have per capita incomes in the
$1 million range and each family will inhabit space stations
comprising of 314 hectares -

As rocketry costs decrease and sophisticated robotic and automation
and AI systems are added to each station - along with sophisticated
medical treatments - propulsion systems will be added to individual
satellites and families will have the option of moving beyond the
intense industrial belts of Earth - for regions beyond Earth orbit -
and even with the development of very powerful lasers near the solar
surface - regions beyond the solar system.

On 31 Jan, 00:17, wrote:
http://www.fas.usda.gov/ffpd/Newsroom/2007%20Wood.pdf

The US uses 1 cubic meter of softwood and 0.4 cubic meter of hardwood
per person per year. *If the entire world were to use paper and wood
at this rate the world would need 6.6 billion cubic meters of softwood
and 2.7 billion cubic meters of hardwood each year. *This is 11x the
annual production of these products in the world today.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/Eco/EEch8_ss6.htm

Forest plantations produce 4 cubic meters of wood product per hectare
per year. *That means 2.8 people may be supported per hectare. *280
people per square kilometer. *Approximately 1/10th the number of
people supported by an equivalent area of ag satellite.

Clearly, forestry satellites will be built later than ag satellites
since to take advantage of learning curve effects as well as existing
capital in place following an ag build out - to reduce plantation
costs.

I wrote earlier about a collection of 676,000 satellites in a sun
synchronous polar orbit above Earth forming a band 1,000 km to 1,026
km above the Earth made from 1,000 select asteroidal fragments
retrieved from the asteroid belt.

These satellites fly in an orbital plane that is constantly
perpendicular to the sun. *Thus the satellites are in constant
sunlight. *Each consists of cylinders 1 km in diameter intercepting
0.785 km2 of sunlight - and illuminating 3.140 km2 of cylinder area.
Thus, the cylinder is 1 km tall.

Each of these satellites can support 879 persons in their wood
needs.

The light falls on a shaped conical reflector that has two lobes.
Each lobe reflects incident light across 90 degrees of cylinder
circumference - with constant intensity along the height of the
cylinder. *There are two regions of highest intensity - which peaks at
1,000 w/m2 - separated by 180 degrees - so these are two lines on the
cylinder on opposite sides. * The intensity falls off along a cosine
curve to zero intensity at plus and minus 45 degrees. *from 45 degrees
to 135 degrees and from -45 degrees to -135 degress - the cylinder is
in darkness - simulating night.

To maintain 1 gee force the cylinder rotates once every 44.8342
seconds. * The two lobed mirror described above rotates once every
44.8458 seconds. *The slight difference in rotation rate means that
the two bright lobes sweep across the cylinder *every 24 hours -
simulating the day night cycle of Earth.

With 6.6 billion people a total of 7,508,533 satellites are needed to
supply them all with wood.

At an altitude of 1,026 km above Earth the ag satellite system ends.
Capturing another 1,000 asteroids and operating at 1,186 km altitude
in the same orbit above Earth as the agicultural cylinders - each
asteroid is separated from the others by 47.5 km. *These are equipped
with productive capabilities that allow them to produce 7,520
satellites from each of the captured asteroids in a plane extending
downward 160 km.- 47 km wide - 7520 cylinders in all each 1 km in
diameter. *A total area of 23.6 million sq km forestry plantations.

A total of 3.44 cubic meters of wood per day is produced by each
satellite - an average weight of 1800 kg per day of wood. *A very
small flow rate reflecting the longer grow times of woods. *Total flow
for humanity is 13,536,000 metric tons per day for the whole
plantation system.

This may be increased slightly due to the coproduction of consumable
products in a forest setting. *Products like mushrooms, nuts and
various fruits may be produced in parallel.

Roughly speaking on a recurring basis, this system requires about 76%
of the flow rate of the ag system described previously. *A total of
200 years of production may be supported with this system. *About four
harvests of most woods.

Just as the food products may be processed on orbit with telerobotic
labor, so too may the wood products be similarly processed. *Furniture
and building components may be produced on orbit and delivered to end
users.

Other fibers include wool and cotton.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/cot...ottonmilldeman...

Total fiber demand is about 15 kg and approximately 7 kg is cotton for
the average American. *Translating this to the entire Earth means
271,040 metric tons per day - which is but a slight adjustment,
especially when given the short life cycle of cotton and the foodstuff
of sheep.

The transition from ore processing to finished good processing to
fabrication to high intensity agriculture to forestry is nearly a
continuous transition in intensity per unit area

http://www.steeldynamics.com/investo...SDI%2010k-2001...

Modern steel producers require about 3 sq km of surface area to
produce 1 million metric tons of steel per year from iron ore.
Factories process 100,000 metric tons of products in the same area per
year. *Agricultural systems produce 10,000 metric tons of food
products per year from the same area. *Forestry systems produce 1,000
metric tons of wood and fiber products per year from the same area.

* * * Raw materials * 1,000,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Finished goods * *100,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Agricultural goods *10,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Wood & Fiber * * * * *1,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Private Residences * * 100 metric tons per year per satellite

Number of Satellites

* * * * Raw materials * * * * * * * * * 10,000
* * * * Finished goods * * * * * * * *100,000
* * * * Agricultural goods * * * * 1,000,000
* * * * Wood and Fiber * * * * * 10,000,000
* * * * Private Residences *2,000,000,000

Habitats with daily commutes to Earth and back process approximately
100 metric tons per year - given that each person masses approximately
80 kg with 3.5 people per satellite on average.

Again, as the volume of satellites increase and their use spreads, it
is reasonable to conclude that residential use will expand.

The large 20 fold increase in the number of residences when compared
to the growth in number of satellites needed for other uses suggest
some sort of disconnect. *This can easily be remedied by observing
that we have assumed the per capita income of the average American, as
a global standard of consumption. *While this represents a massive
increase in the standard of living world wide (11x) it would be naive
to believe this to be an end point in human development. *In fact, we
can look at the amount of wood, fibers, metal and so forth, used by
different income groups throughout the world, compared to the surface
area projected for the private residences, and we see that by
increasing per capita income from $45,000 per year (US average) to
$1,000,000 per year - the disconnect disappears as the number of
satellites grow to meet this need.

* * * * Raw materials * * * * * * * * *200,000
* * * * Finished goods * * * * * * *2,000,000
* * * * Agricultural goods * * * *20,000,000
* * * * Wood and Fiber * * * * *200,000,000
* * * * Private Residences *2,000,000,000

So we build for a 220x increase in consumption, from the global
average today, not the 11x to meet today's US per capita
consumption.

We could of course increase the number of people aboard each satellite
increasing them to 75 people per satellite. *This is about 20 hectares
per household. *But to maintain a lower mass flow rate requires
visiting the Earth once every 3 weeks or so - which makes the orbiting
community pretty isolated from the Earth.

Of course every satellite will be operated for a profit - so the
numbers will continue to grow until the marginal profits decline below
the returns available from other investment vehicles. *In short there
are no arbitrary limits as to when people will use residences, or how
dense they will be an so forth. *The only thing this calculation is
intended for here is to determine when MOST people will use MOST of
the off-world assets, what the largest use rate will be, and plan
systems around that.

It seems most reasonable to me, notwithstanding early developments in
the field - i.e. a space hotel, or a lunar golf community, etc., that
when most people leave Earth they will have per capita incomes in the
$1 million range and each family will inhabit space stations
comprising of 314 hectares -

As rocketry costs decrease and sophisticated robotic and automation
and AI systems are added to each station - along with sophisticated
medical treatments - propulsion systems will be added to individual
satellites and families will have the option of moving beyond the
intense industrial belts of Earth - for regions beyond Earth orbit -
and even with the development of very powerful lasers near the solar
surface - regions beyond the solar system.

I think it would be far better to grow a forest in the Sahara. Energy
for the desalination of sea water to be provoded by solar power,
possibly SSP. If we assume SSP (terresrial SP merely adds to the force
of the argument) we need far less material in space doing it this way.


- Ian Parker

On Jan 31, 5:33*am, Ian Parker wrote:
On 31 Jan, 00:17, wrote:





http://www.fas.usda.gov/ffpd/Newsroom/2007%20Wood.pdf

The US uses 1 cubic meter of softwood and 0.4 cubic meter of hardwood
per person per year. *If the entire world were to use paper and wood
at this rate the world would need 6.6 billion cubic meters of softwood
and 2.7 billion cubic meters of hardwood each year. *This is 11x the
annual production of these products in the world today.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/Eco/EEch8_ss6.htm

Forest plantations produce 4 cubic meters of wood product per hectare
per year. *That means 2.8 people may be supported per hectare. *280
people per square kilometer. *Approximately 1/10th the number of
people supported by an equivalent area of ag satellite.

Clearly, forestry satellites will be built later than ag satellites
since to take advantage of learning curve effects as well as existing
capital in place following an ag build out - to reduce plantation
costs.

I wrote earlier about a collection of 676,000 satellites in a sun
synchronous polar orbit above Earth forming a band 1,000 km to 1,026
km above the Earth made from 1,000 select asteroidal fragments
retrieved from the asteroid belt.

These satellites fly in an orbital plane that is constantly
perpendicular to the sun. *Thus the satellites are in constant
sunlight. *Each consists of cylinders 1 km in diameter intercepting
0.785 km2 of sunlight - and illuminating 3.140 km2 of cylinder area.
Thus, the cylinder is 1 km tall.

Each of these satellites can support 879 persons in their wood
needs.

The light falls on a shaped conical reflector that has two lobes.
Each lobe reflects incident light across 90 degrees of cylinder
circumference - with constant intensity along the height of the
cylinder. *There are two regions of highest intensity - which peaks at
1,000 w/m2 - separated by 180 degrees - so these are two lines on the
cylinder on opposite sides. * The intensity falls off along a cosine
curve to zero intensity at plus and minus 45 degrees. *from 45 degrees
to 135 degrees and from -45 degrees to -135 degress - the cylinder is
in darkness - simulating night.

To maintain 1 gee force the cylinder rotates once every 44.8342
seconds. * The two lobed mirror described above rotates once every
44.8458 seconds. *The slight difference in rotation rate means that
the two bright lobes sweep across the cylinder *every 24 hours -
simulating the day night cycle of Earth.

With 6.6 billion people a total of 7,508,533 satellites are needed to
supply them all with wood.

At an altitude of 1,026 km above Earth the ag satellite system ends.
Capturing another 1,000 asteroids and operating at 1,186 km altitude
in the same orbit above Earth as the agicultural cylinders - each
asteroid is separated from the others by 47.5 km. *These are equipped
with productive capabilities that allow them to produce 7,520
satellites from each of the captured asteroids in a plane extending
downward 160 km.- 47 km wide - 7520 cylinders in all each 1 km in
diameter. *A total area of 23.6 million sq km forestry plantations.

A total of 3.44 cubic meters of wood per day is produced by each
satellite - an average weight of 1800 kg per day of wood. *A very
small flow rate reflecting the longer grow times of woods. *Total flow
for humanity is 13,536,000 metric tons per day for the whole
plantation system.

This may be increased slightly due to the coproduction of consumable
products in a forest setting. *Products like mushrooms, nuts and
various fruits may be produced in parallel.

Roughly speaking on a recurring basis, this system requires about 76%
of the flow rate of the ag system described previously. *A total of
200 years of production may be supported with this system. *About four
harvests of most woods.

Just as the food products may be processed on orbit with telerobotic
labor, so too may the wood products be similarly processed. *Furniture
and building components may be produced on orbit and delivered to end
users.

Other fibers include wool and cotton.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/cot...ottonmilldeman...

Total fiber demand is about 15 kg and approximately 7 kg is cotton for
the average American. *Translating this to the entire Earth means
271,040 metric tons per day - which is but a slight adjustment,
especially when given the short life cycle of cotton and the foodstuff
of sheep.

The transition from ore processing to finished good processing to
fabrication to high intensity agriculture to forestry is nearly a
continuous transition in intensity per unit area

http://www.steeldynamics.com/investo...SDI%2010k-2001...

Modern steel producers require about 3 sq km of surface area to
produce 1 million metric tons of steel per year from iron ore.
Factories process 100,000 metric tons of products in the same area per
year. *Agricultural systems produce 10,000 metric tons of food
products per year from the same area. *Forestry systems produce 1,000
metric tons of wood and fiber products per year from the same area.

* * * Raw materials * 1,000,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Finished goods * *100,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Agricultural goods *10,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Wood & Fiber * * * * *1,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Private Residences * * 100 metric tons per year per satellite

Number of Satellites

* * * * Raw materials * * * * * * * * * 10,000
* * * * Finished goods * * * * * * * *100,000
* * * * Agricultural goods * * * * 1,000,000
* * * * Wood and Fiber * * * * * 10,000,000
* * * * Private Residences *2,000,000,000

Habitats with daily commutes to Earth and back process approximately
100 metric tons per year - given that each person masses approximately
80 kg with 3.5 people per satellite on average.

Again, as the volume of satellites increase and their use spreads, it
is reasonable to conclude that residential use will expand.

The large 20 fold increase in the number of residences when compared
to the growth in number of satellites needed for other uses suggest
some sort of disconnect. *This can easily be remedied by observing
that we have assumed the per capita income of the average American, as
a global standard of consumption. *While this represents a massive
increase in the standard of living world wide (11x) it would be naive
to believe this to be an end point in human development. *In fact, we
can look at the amount of wood, fibers, metal and so forth, used by
different income groups throughout the world, compared to the surface
area projected for the private residences, and we see that by
increasing per capita income from $45,000 per year (US average) to
$1,000,000 per year - the disconnect disappears as the number of
satellites grow to meet this need.

* * * * Raw materials * * * * * * * * *200,000
* * * * Finished goods * * * * * * *2,000,000
* * * * Agricultural goods * * * *20,000,000
* * * * Wood and Fiber * * * * *200,000,000
* * * * Private Residences *2,000,000,000

So we build for a 220x increase in consumption, from the global
average today, not the 11x to meet today's US per capita
consumption.

We could of course increase the number of people aboard each satellite
increasing them to 75 people per satellite. *This is about 20 hectares
per household. *But to maintain a lower mass flow rate requires
visiting the Earth once every 3 weeks or so - which makes the orbiting
community pretty isolated from the Earth.

Of course every satellite will be operated for a profit - so the
numbers will continue to grow until the marginal profits decline below
the returns available from other investment vehicles. *In short there
are no arbitrary limits as to when people will use residences, or how
dense they will be an so forth. *The only thing this calculation is
intended for here is to determine when MOST people will use MOST of
the off-world assets, what the largest use rate will be, and plan
systems around that.

It seems most reasonable to me, notwithstanding early developments in
the field - i.e. a space hotel, or a lunar golf community, etc., that
when most people leave Earth they will have per capita incomes in the
$1 million range and each family will inhabit space stations
comprising of 314 hectares -

As rocketry costs decrease and sophisticated robotic and automation
and AI systems are added to each station - along with sophisticated
medical treatments - propulsion systems will be added to individual
satellites and families will have the option of moving beyond the
intense industrial belts of Earth - for regions beyond Earth orbit -
and even with the development of very powerful lasers near the solar
surface - regions beyond the solar system.

I think it would be far better to grow a forest in the Sahara. Energy
for the desalination of sea water to be provoded by solar power,
possibly SSP. If we assume SSP (terresrial SP merely adds to the force
of the argument) we need far less material in space doing it this way.

* - Ian Parker- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Got numbers?

I do.

When you start building space colonies on the scale i'm talking about
there are huge economies of scale - once you put the basic
infrastructure in place. So, if you're going to build power
satellites, you might as well build factory satellites. If you're
going to build factory satellites you're well suited to build farm
satellites. And if you're building farms, well, at some point it
makes sense to build forest satellites. And if you'v done forests
profitably, you will start some day to sell space homes with your
spare capacity.

As you descend the cost per square meter curve - which is sort of like
the cost per feature on a silicon wafer - then you can go along the
development curve I've outlined - with about 2.3 billion stations when
all is said and done - and about $1 million per year income per person
- all by 2080 - The US would grow at 4.4% per year to achieve this
end, and the world 6.6% to achieve this end.

Sort of like saying in the age of mainframes, that one day computers
will be on every desktop of every home in the world. So, yeah, over
the net 72 years we'll see a spaceship in every garage and people
will live in space stations and visit the Earth the way we now visit a
national park or disney land.

On Jan 31, 5:33*am, Ian Parker wrote:
On 31 Jan, 00:17, wrote:





http://www.fas.usda.gov/ffpd/Newsroom/2007%20Wood.pdf

The US uses 1 cubic meter of softwood and 0.4 cubic meter of hardwood
per person per year. *If the entire world were to use paper and wood
at this rate the world would need 6.6 billion cubic meters of softwood
and 2.7 billion cubic meters of hardwood each year. *This is 11x the
annual production of these products in the world today.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/Eco/EEch8_ss6.htm

Forest plantations produce 4 cubic meters of wood product per hectare
per year. *That means 2.8 people may be supported per hectare. *280
people per square kilometer. *Approximately 1/10th the number of
people supported by an equivalent area of ag satellite.

Clearly, forestry satellites will be built later than ag satellites
since to take advantage of learning curve effects as well as existing
capital in place following an ag build out - to reduce plantation
costs.

I wrote earlier about a collection of 676,000 satellites in a sun
synchronous polar orbit above Earth forming a band 1,000 km to 1,026
km above the Earth made from 1,000 select asteroidal fragments
retrieved from the asteroid belt.

These satellites fly in an orbital plane that is constantly
perpendicular to the sun. *Thus the satellites are in constant
sunlight. *Each consists of cylinders 1 km in diameter intercepting
0.785 km2 of sunlight - and illuminating 3.140 km2 of cylinder area.
Thus, the cylinder is 1 km tall.

Each of these satellites can support 879 persons in their wood
needs.

The light falls on a shaped conical reflector that has two lobes.
Each lobe reflects incident light across 90 degrees of cylinder
circumference - with constant intensity along the height of the
cylinder. *There are two regions of highest intensity - which peaks at
1,000 w/m2 - separated by 180 degrees - so these are two lines on the
cylinder on opposite sides. * The intensity falls off along a cosine
curve to zero intensity at plus and minus 45 degrees. *from 45 degrees
to 135 degrees and from -45 degrees to -135 degress - the cylinder is
in darkness - simulating night.

To maintain 1 gee force the cylinder rotates once every 44.8342
seconds. * The two lobed mirror described above rotates once every
44.8458 seconds. *The slight difference in rotation rate means that
the two bright lobes sweep across the cylinder *every 24 hours -
simulating the day night cycle of Earth.

With 6.6 billion people a total of 7,508,533 satellites are needed to
supply them all with wood.

At an altitude of 1,026 km above Earth the ag satellite system ends.
Capturing another 1,000 asteroids and operating at 1,186 km altitude
in the same orbit above Earth as the agicultural cylinders - each
asteroid is separated from the others by 47.5 km. *These are equipped
with productive capabilities that allow them to produce 7,520
satellites from each of the captured asteroids in a plane extending
downward 160 km.- 47 km wide - 7520 cylinders in all each 1 km in
diameter. *A total area of 23.6 million sq km forestry plantations.

A total of 3.44 cubic meters of wood per day is produced by each
satellite - an average weight of 1800 kg per day of wood. *A very
small flow rate reflecting the longer grow times of woods. *Total flow
for humanity is 13,536,000 metric tons per day for the whole
plantation system.

This may be increased slightly due to the coproduction of consumable
products in a forest setting. *Products like mushrooms, nuts and
various fruits may be produced in parallel.

Roughly speaking on a recurring basis, this system requires about 76%
of the flow rate of the ag system described previously. *A total of
200 years of production may be supported with this system. *About four
harvests of most woods.

Just as the food products may be processed on orbit with telerobotic
labor, so too may the wood products be similarly processed. *Furniture
and building components may be produced on orbit and delivered to end
users.

Other fibers include wool and cotton.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/cot...ottonmilldeman...

Total fiber demand is about 15 kg and approximately 7 kg is cotton for
the average American. *Translating this to the entire Earth means
271,040 metric tons per day - which is but a slight adjustment,
especially when given the short life cycle of cotton and the foodstuff
of sheep.

The transition from ore processing to finished good processing to
fabrication to high intensity agriculture to forestry is nearly a
continuous transition in intensity per unit area

http://www.steeldynamics.com/investo...SDI%2010k-2001...

Modern steel producers require about 3 sq km of surface area to
produce 1 million metric tons of steel per year from iron ore.
Factories process 100,000 metric tons of products in the same area per
year. *Agricultural systems produce 10,000 metric tons of food
products per year from the same area. *Forestry systems produce 1,000
metric tons of wood and fiber products per year from the same area.

* * * Raw materials * 1,000,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Finished goods * *100,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Agricultural goods *10,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Wood & Fiber * * * * *1,000 metric tons per year per satellite
* * * Private Residences * * 100 metric tons per year per satellite

Number of Satellites

* * * * Raw materials * * * * * * * * * 10,000
* * * * Finished goods * * * * * * * *100,000
* * * * Agricultural goods * * * * 1,000,000
* * * * Wood and Fiber * * * * * 10,000,000
* * * * Private Residences *2,000,000,000

Habitats with daily commutes to Earth and back process approximately
100 metric tons per year - given that each person masses approximately
80 kg with 3.5 people per satellite on average.

Again, as the volume of satellites increase and their use spreads, it
is reasonable to conclude that residential use will expand.

The large 20 fold increase in the number of residences when compared
to the growth in number of satellites needed for other uses suggest
some sort of disconnect. *This can easily be remedied by observing
that we have assumed the per capita income of the average American, as
a global standard of consumption. *While this represents a massive
increase in the standard of living world wide (11x) it would be naive
to believe this to be an end point in human development. *In fact, we
can look at the amount of wood, fibers, metal and so forth, used by
different income groups throughout the world, compared to the surface
area projected for the private residences, and we see that by
increasing per capita income from $45,000 per year (US average) to
$1,000,000 per year - the disconnect disappears as the number of
satellites grow to meet this need.

* * * * Raw materials * * * * * * * * *200,000
* * * * Finished goods * * * * * * *2,000,000
* * * * Agricultural goods * * * *20,000,000
* * * * Wood and Fiber * * * * *200,000,000
* * * * Private Residences *2,000,000,000

So we build for a 220x increase in consumption, from the global
average today, not the 11x to meet today's US per capita
consumption.

We could of course increase the number of people aboard each satellite
increasing them to 75 people per satellite. *This is about 20 hectares
per household. *But to maintain a lower mass flow rate requires
visiting the Earth once every 3 weeks or so - which makes the orbiting
community pretty isolated from the Earth.

Of course every satellite will be operated for a profit - so the
numbers will continue to grow until the marginal profits decline below
the returns available from other investment vehicles. *In short there
are no arbitrary limits as to when people will use residences, or how
dense they will be an so forth. *The only thing this calculation is
intended for here is to determine when MOST people will use MOST of
the off-world assets, what the largest use rate will be, and plan
systems around that.

It seems most reasonable to me, notwithstanding early developments in
the field - i.e. a space hotel, or a lunar golf community, etc., that
when most people leave Earth they will have per capita incomes in the
$1 million range and each family will inhabit space stations
comprising of 314 hectares -

As rocketry costs decrease and sophisticated robotic and automation
and AI systems are added to each station - along with sophisticated
medical treatments - propulsion systems will be added to individual
satellites and families will have the option of moving beyond the
intense industrial belts of Earth - for regions beyond Earth orbit -
and even with the development of very powerful lasers near the solar
surface - regions beyond the solar system.

I think it would be far better to grow a forest in the Sahara. Energy
for the desalination of sea water to be provoded by solar power,
possibly SSP. If we assume SSP (terresrial SP merely adds to the force
of the argument) we need far less material in space doing it this way.

* - Ian Parker- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara

The Sahara is 9 million sq km and its environment is uncontrollable.

The 7.5 million satellites total over 23 million sq km and their
environment is very controllable.

Soil conditions are no suitable for forests in the Sahara. Soil
conditions are whatever we make them on orbit.

How much water is needed? How much infrastructure? Greenhouses for
forests have not been built yet. Its not clear using terrestrial
supply chains, that the same economies of scale are possible on Earth
as on orbit. There are economies of scale for very large space
stations that are produced in zero gee - that can reduce their costs
dramatically. Similar physical processes do not exist for terrestrial
greenhouses.

I have looked at the Sahara and you might be able to develop advanced
low cost green hourses from molded PET combined with large
desalination plants - powered from space - covering 9 million sq km -
enough to provide the world's food supply - at the US per capita rate.

But the productive capacity of forests is such that it is beyond the
limits of terrestrial construction to make money at that.

Besides anything on Earth is necessarily limited.

There already exists a large forest stretching from Norway to Siberia
throughout Russia - with sufficient standing mass on 23 million sq km
of land - to provide for all the world's need for wood for about 200
years at the rate I am projecting. It cannot be extended in size or
time however - and is best left in its natural state. .

http://www.unep-wcmc.org/forest/I/glob_fullclass3.gif

The ultimate cost of harvesiting forests in place is that they turn
the bulk of this biomass into a desert eventually. Notice that the
forest comes right down to Mongolia - and stops at the Great Wall of
China.

Humans did that. 'developing' this biomass will turn the forested
region from Norway to Siberia into a desert in about 200 years - and
demand growth beyond present US per capita rate - cannot be
supported.

We'd like to establish a direct from off-world marketing system that
bypasses ancient terrestrial means of distribution.

We'd like to avoid turning the Earth into a desert and leaving it to
future generations to figure out what to do with the mess.

Of course, this terrestrial resource can be developed and exploited as
the satellite network grows its first crop - say in about 30 years -
and the forests can be used as seed stock for the satellite network
and then restored as the satellite system grows.

So they're not mutually exclusive.

Surveying the world's forests from orbit, and creating a system of
heavy lift balloons to harvest wood from the air - a flying automated
sawmill - sort of like the Predator aircraft on steroids - but with
its sights on wood. would supply wood and manage this large area
quite handily .

http://www.worldskycat.com/markets/skyfreight.html

cruising down from the skies, picking up wood out of the forests
without any access roads or logging roads - and wafting it at high
speed while processing it on board - transporting the wood to
automated centers that process it further into a wide range of product
for distribution to markets.

Humanity consuming 5 billion metric tons of wood per year - and these
balloons processing 1,000 metric tons of wood per day - means that
13,400 balloons operating out of 268 aerodromes spread across this
landscape, with terrestrial road and rail to retrieve the wood
products and bring them to market.

Delivery from orbit would not be possible, and a new distribution
network would have to be established and integrated with existing
supply chains, and new supply chains would have to be established.

We could certainly develop wood products that way - but it is just as
costly and provides limited opportunities for establihing efficient
global markets for goods delivered from space and has no opoortunity
for growth beyond the confines outlined here. So, it leaves to those
in 25 years to still solve the problems of long term growth we could
just as easily solve today..

As a seed stock and training grounds and basis for national growth
supporting the orbital system - it makes sense. Also as a production
source until the orbiting forests are ready to harvest from their off-
world plantations makes sense too..

75,000 balloons with a 1,500 metric ton cargo capacity operating
throughout the world at 400 kph - could deliver all the food and wood
around the world in four days or less. They would be floated by
hydogen gas, and use fuel cells to convert the hydrogen to drive the
vehicle - and refuel at aerodromes equipped to produce hydrogen from
water using sunlight and laser power from space.. .

On Jan 31, 2:33 am, Ian Parker wrote:

I think it would be far better to grow a forest in the Sahara. Energy
for the desalination of sea water to be provoded by solar power,
possibly SSP. If we assume SSP (terresrial SP merely adds to the force
of the argument) we need far less material in space doing it this way.

- Ian Parker

It's not lord Mook's idea, so without a speck of remorse it simply
can't be done, no matters what.
- Brad Guth

On Jan 31, 2:10*pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jan 31, 2:33 am, Ian Parker wrote:



I think it would be far better to grow a forest in the Sahara. Energy
for the desalination of sea water to be provoded by solar power,
possibly SSP. If we assume SSP (terresrial SP merely adds to the force
of the argument) we need far less material in space doing it this way.

* - Ian Parker

It's not lord Mook's idea, so without a speck of remorse it simply
can't be done, no matters what.
- Brad Guth

Reality doesn't need my defense. I am telling you why I favor
asteroid development over stripping and modifying the natural systems
of Earth with industrial disease. If you have a better idea and I'm
wrong - go out and do it. No one's stopping you.

On Jan 31, 12:59 pm, wrote:
On Jan 31, 2:10 pm, BradGuth wrote:

On Jan 31, 2:33 am, Ian Parker wrote:

I think it would be far better to grow a forest in the Sahara. Energy
for the desalination of sea water to be provoded by solar power,
possibly SSP. If we assume SSP (terresrial SP merely adds to the force
of the argument) we need far less material in space doing it this way.

- Ian Parker

It's not lord Mook's idea, so without a speck of remorse it simply
can't be done, no matters what.
- Brad Guth

Reality doesn't need my defense. I am telling you why I favor
asteroid development over stripping and modifying the natural systems
of Earth with industrial disease. If you have a better idea and I'm
wrong - go out and do it. No one's stopping you.

Your idea isn't just wrong, it represents a net loss of energy and
viable resources, not to mention further pollution and spendy decades
of which we do not have such spare loot or time to work with,
especially if we keep ****ing off those mostly nice Muslims or of
whatever's represented by China.
- Brad Guth

On Jan 31, 8:30*pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jan 31, 12:59 pm, wrote:





On Jan 31, 2:10 pm, BradGuth wrote:

On Jan 31, 2:33 am, Ian Parker wrote:

I think it would be far better to grow a forest in the Sahara. Energy
for the desalination of sea water to be provoded by solar power,
possibly SSP. If we assume SSP (terresrial SP merely adds to the force
of the argument) we need far less material in space doing it this way.

* - Ian Parker

It's not lord Mook's idea, so without a speck of remorse it simply
can't be done, no matters what.
- Brad Guth

Reality doesn't need my defense. *I am telling you why I favor
asteroid development over stripping and modifying the natural systems
of Earth with industrial disease. *If you have a better idea and I'm
wrong - go out and do it. *No one's stopping you.

Your idea isn't just wrong,

In what sense?

it represents a net loss of energy

From compared to what?

Are you talking about moving stuff from the asteroid belt to your
dinner table? or the shirt on your back? You think that takes a lot
of energy?

Well let's see.

To move a metric ton to Earth orbit most energy efficiently from the
asteroid belt requires that 1.72 tons of propellant be ejected at 8 km/
sec.

That takes 55.04 GJ of energy per ton of payload.

The average American consumes about 1 ton of food per year and 0.6
tons of wood products (0.4 tons softwood, 0.2 tons hardwood) Another
0.05 tons in other consumable products. That's 1.75 tons of
materials.

The processes I use are about 50% efficient - that means we need to
process about 3.5 tons per year per person in consumables imported
from the asteroid belt.

Every ton processed per year requires about 6 tons of standing capital
equipment - amortized over 12 years - so, that's another half ton per
year to the total

That's a movement of 4 tons per year per person at an energy cost of
220.16 GJ per person per year.

To eject 3.5 tons per year from LEO directly to a consumer on Earth's
surface requires that the products be accelerated to a speed of about
0.2 km/sec - relative to the station. That's another 0.07 GJ - double
this for efficiency losses in the rail gun - raising the total to
220.30 GJ per person per year. This is equivalent to 36.1 barrels of
oil equivalent in terms of energy per person per year. This is
equivalent to less than 7,000 watts of continuous power.

A solar panel located in the sun 24/7 - generating laser energy with
40% overall efficiency - would need to cover 12.77 sq meters of are.
That's a disk 4 meters in diameter. At $0.01 per watt - this has a
capital cost of $70 - and costs about $5 per year with my
technology.about a dime a week.

Not costly at all.

and
viable resources,

There are no resources used on Earth at all. In fact, the materials
are all biodegradable (food, wood, fiber)

not to mention further pollution and spendy decades

Its part of a development progam to use hardware to make energy
cheaper that would otherwise sit idle.

Check it out.

The world currently consumes

28.3 billion barrels of oil
5.5 billion tons of coal
2.2 billion tons of natural gas

each year! To generate 15 trillion watts of power continuously. This
can all be replaced with with solar panels creating 3.34 billion tons
of hydrogen gas from 30 billion tons of water using solar panels.

We can build 19 trillion watts of solar collectors on orbit and beam
the energy to Earth, or we can bild 115 trillion watts of solar
collectors on Earth and arrange to operate the equipment when the sun
shines.

The space based system produces 546 MW per square kilometer and costs
$0.01 per peak watt - the terrestrial system produces 180 MW per
square kilometer and costs $0.07 per peak watt.

So, in terms of system costs;

SPACE: 19,000,000 MW
546 MW/km2
34,800 km2
$0.01/watt
$190 billion total

EARTH 115,000,000 MW
180 MW/km2
638,900 km2
$0.07/watt
$8,050 billion total

Now the interesting thing is that by choosing the laser energy
appropriately, we can actually drive terrestrial solar panels with
very high efficiency and operate them at 360 MW/km2 - continuously.
So, we need a total of 52,800 sq km of terrestrial panels to make the
space system work.

So, here's the game plan... when I build out over 52,800 sq km of
solar panels,9.5 trillion watts and $665 billion ... rather than
build more solar panels for use on Earth, it makes more sense to start
building power sats to agument the output from those panels already
existing with power from space. For less than 1/6th the cost of what
I have already spent, I can increase power output 10x and dominate the
energy market.

Since I have options on 100,000 sq km of desert lands, this is a
perfect solution.

The $20 billion development cost for the launchers and so forth are
well worth it.

Now to enter the space business what other 'low hanging fruit' might
you pick to build up your space capacity before doing the powersat
deal. Well, there's communications networks like Teledesic. ITs
something thats profitable and could sustain the development of a
entry level system.

So, we launch 660 communications satellites to put up a communications
network.

Then we launch 2,000 power satellites at 20 GW each - to provide all
the power we need for the hydrogen economy AND space launch.

The first system would consist of a flight every two weeks - and put
up 1 twenty billion watt power satellite per month. That's 12 per
year. That means 1000 would take over 80 years.

Using power satellites themselves to beam laser energy to a propulsion
unit powered by laser energy - increases the efficiency tremendously.
Instead of one vehicle consisting of 7 flight elements - we can take
each flight element equip it with a laser rocket - and have 28
elements operational. Simpler logistics also means we can shorten
turn around from 8 weeks to 3 weeks.

So a fleet of four vehicles launching a payload every two weeks - with
one kick stage and one satellite - turns into a fleet of 28 vehicles
launching a payload direct to GEO without a kick stage - launches
every 18 hours. Increasing the fleet to 60 elements permits 3
flights per day with spares.

In the latter case we can deploy 1000 power satellites in less than 10
years.

Now, after the power satellites are fully deployed, there will be a
need to grow the system at a rate of about 4% to 7% per year - this is
40 to 70 launches per year to maintain growth.

What do you do with the spare capacity?

Look for other jobs it can do!!!

What is a worthy job?

Well having ended the energy shortage the world economy will take off
(like a rocket) and there will be shortages in other commodities.
Using the US European and Japanese populations as representative
examplars for growth worldwide, we can see that there will be a
shortage of strategic materials, food, fiber and wood. - these.

Could the laser and propulsion systems described above be turned to
that task?

YES!

In fact...

we can for less than HALF the cost of the ALL TERRESTRIAL solution
above - provide not only all the enegy the Earth needs, but all of
every other strategic material as well - at levels far higher than US
per capita.

Check it out - vvvvvall terrestrial: $8,050 billion
space terrestrial;vv $850 billion

That leaves $7,200 billion spare cash sitting around... to provide
enough energy food, and other materials for eveyr man woman and child
to live like a milionaire.

What a HUGE market development opportunity.

Why not do it?

of which we do not have such spare loot or time to work with,

It costs less to build up all the strategic materials in space once
you have a core terrestrial system to work with - than to just blindly
expand the terrestrial system without considering the space
component..

especially if we keep ****ing off those mostly nice Muslims or of
whatever's represented by China.

Nonsequitor.

- Brad Guth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Here we go again, with the William Mook CIA World FactBook.

Anything is possible, but more than likely is WWIII, then WWIV and to
finish off whatever's left with WWV using DDT and VX because, we'll be
flat out of fossil or whatever synfuel, there still will be no such
supply Mook H2, and even yellowcake will have become too limited and
selling for tens of thousands of dollars per kg.
.. - Brad Guth


On Jan 30, 4:17 pm, wrote:
http://www.fas.usda.gov/ffpd/Newsroom/2007%20Wood.pdf

The US uses 1 cubic meter of softwood and 0.4 cubic meter of hardwood
per person per year. If the entire world were to use paper and wood
at this rate the world would need 6.6 billion cubic meters of softwood
and 2.7 billion cubic meters of hardwood each year. This is 11x the
annual production of these products in the world today.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/Eco/EEch8_ss6.htm

Forest plantations produce 4 cubic meters of wood product per hectare
per year. That means 2.8 people may be supported per hectare. 280
people per square kilometer. Approximately 1/10th the number of
people supported by an equivalent area of ag satellite.

Clearly, forestry satellites will be built later than ag satellites
since to take advantage of learning curve effects as well as existing
capital in place following an ag build out - to reduce plantation
costs.

I wrote earlier about a collection of 676,000 satellites in a sun
synchronous polar orbit above Earth forming a band 1,000 km to 1,026
km above the Earth made from 1,000 select asteroidal fragments
retrieved from the asteroid belt.

These satellites fly in an orbital plane that is constantly
perpendicular to the sun. Thus the satellites are in constant
sunlight. Each consists of cylinders 1 km in diameter intercepting
0.785 km2 of sunlight - and illuminating 3.140 km2 of cylinder area.
Thus, the cylinder is 1 km tall.

Each of these satellites can support 879 persons in their wood
needs.

The light falls on a shaped conical reflector that has two lobes.
Each lobe reflects incident light across 90 degrees of cylinder
circumference - with constant intensity along the height of the
cylinder. There are two regions of highest intensity - which peaks at
1,000 w/m2 - separated by 180 degrees - so these are two lines on the
cylinder on opposite sides. The intensity falls off along a cosine
curve to zero intensity at plus and minus 45 degrees. from 45 degrees
to 135 degrees and from -45 degrees to -135 degress - the cylinder is
in darkness - simulating night.

To maintain 1 gee force the cylinder rotates once every 44.8342
seconds. The two lobed mirror described above rotates once every
44.8458 seconds. The slight difference in rotation rate means that
the two bright lobes sweep across the cylinder every 24 hours -
simulating the day night cycle of Earth.

With 6.6 billion people a total of 7,508,533 satellites are needed to
supply them all with wood.

At an altitude of 1,026 km above Earth the ag satellite system ends.
Capturing another 1,000 asteroids and operating at 1,186 km altitude
in the same orbit above Earth as the agicultural cylinders - each
asteroid is separated from the others by 47.5 km. These are equipped
with productive capabilities that allow them to produce 7,520
satellites from each of the captured asteroids in a plane extending
downward 160 km.- 47 km wide - 7520 cylinders in all each 1 km in
diameter. A total area of 23.6 million sq km forestry plantations.

A total of 3.44 cubic meters of wood per day is produced by each
satellite - an average weight of 1800 kg per day of wood. A very
small flow rate reflecting the longer grow times of woods. Total flow
for humanity is 13,536,000 metric tons per day for the whole
plantation system.

This may be increased slightly due to the coproduction of consumable
products in a forest setting. Products like mushrooms, nuts and
various fruits may be produced in parallel.

Roughly speaking on a recurring basis, this system requires about 76%
of the flow rate of the ag system described previously. A total of
200 years of production may be supported with this system. About four
harvests of most woods.

Just as the food products may be processed on orbit with telerobotic
labor, so too may the wood products be similarly processed. Furniture
and building components may be produced on orbit and delivered to end
users.

Other fibers include wool and cotton.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/cot...ottonmilldeman...

Total fiber demand is about 15 kg and approximately 7 kg is cotton for
the average American. Translating this to the entire Earth means
271,040 metric tons per day - which is but a slight adjustment,
especially when given the short life cycle of cotton and the foodstuff
of sheep.

The transition from ore processing to finished good processing to
fabrication to high intensity agriculture to forestry is nearly a
continuous transition in intensity per unit area

http://www.steeldynamics.com/investo...SDI%2010k-2001...

Modern steel producers require about 3 sq km of surface area to
produce 1 million metric tons of steel per year from iron ore.
Factories process 100,000 metric tons of products in the same area per
year. Agricultural systems produce 10,000 metric tons of food
products per year from the same area. Forestry systems produce 1,000
metric tons of wood and fiber products per year from the same area.

Raw materials 1,000,000 metric tons per year per satellite
Finished goods 100,000 metric tons per year per satellite
Agricultural goods 10,000 metric tons per year per satellite
Wood & Fiber 1,000 metric tons per year per satellite
Private Residences 100 metric tons per year per satellite

Number of Satellites

Raw materials 10,000
Finished goods 100,000
Agricultural goods 1,000,000
Wood and Fiber 10,000,000
Private Residences 2,000,000,000

Habitats with daily commutes to Earth and back process approximately
100 metric tons per year - given that each person masses approximately
80 kg with 3.5 people per satellite on average.

Again, as the volume of satellites increase and their use spreads, it
is reasonable to conclude that residential use will expand.

The large 20 fold increase in the number of residences when compared
to the growth in number of satellites needed for other uses suggest
some sort of disconnect. This can easily be remedied by observing
that we have assumed the per capita income of the average American, as
a global standard of consumption. While this represents a massive
increase in the standard of living world wide (11x) it would be naive
to believe this to be an end point in human development. In fact, we
can look at the amount of wood, fibers, metal and so forth, used by
different income groups throughout the world, compared to the surface
area projected for the private residences, and we see that by
increasing per capita income from $45,000 per year (US average) to
$1,000,000 per year - the disconnect disappears as the number of
satellites grow to meet this need.

Raw materials 200,000
Finished goods 2,000,000
Agricultural goods 20,000,000
Wood and Fiber 200,000,000
Private Residences 2,000,000,000

So we build for a 220x increase in consumption, from the global
average today, not the 11x to meet today's US per capita
consumption.

We could of course increase the number of people aboard each satellite
increasing them to 75 people per satellite. This is about 20 hectares
per household. But to maintain a lower mass flow rate requires
visiting the Earth once every 3 weeks or so - which makes the orbiting
community pretty isolated from the Earth.

Of course every satellite will be operated for a profit - so the
numbers will continue to grow until the marginal profits decline below
the returns available from other investment vehicles. In short there
are no arbitrary limits as to when people will use residences, or how
dense they will be an so forth. The only thing this calculation is
intended for here is to determine when MOST people will use MOST of
the off-world assets, what the largest use rate will be, and plan
systems around that.

It seems most reasonable to me, notwithstanding early developments in
the field - i.e. a space hotel, or a lunar golf community, etc., that
when most people leave Earth they will have per capita incomes in the
$1 million range and each family will inhabit space stations
comprising of 314 hectares -

As rocketry costs decrease and sophisticated robotic and automation
and AI systems are added to each station - along with sophisticated
medical treatments - propulsion systems will be added to individual
satellites and families will have the option of moving beyond the
intense industrial belts of Earth - for regions beyond Earth orbit -
and even with the development of very powerful lasers near the solar
surface - regions beyond the solar system.

wrote in message
...

Clearly, forestry satellites will be built later than ag satellites

This made the "Valley Forge" theme from "Silent Running" start playing in my
head.

I remember back in the days when I used to monkey around in AutoCAD, I had a
go at making the Valley Forge a bit more technically realistic. I turned
the domes inward rather than outward, and had the ship rotate on its axis so
that we could have centrifugal "gravity". Above each dome I put an
oval-shaped mirror at a 45degree angle to reflect sunlight down into the
interior of each dome. Of course that implies the axis of the ship tracks
the sun as the ship orbits, which means we would need two equal masses
counter-rotating so that we can steadily turn the axis.

I also put in the tunnels which were quite clearly depicted in the interior
scenes, but curiously were missing from the ship model.

--


Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By all that you hold dear on this good Earth
I bid you stand, Men of the West!
Aragorn