A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Coal is Toxic - need SPS



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 23rd 04, 09:27 PM
Richard Lamb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Coal is Toxic - need SPS

Mike Combs wrote:

"Alex Terrell" wrote in message
om...

It has been estimated by SSI that only 10% of the mass of an SPS would

have
to come from Earth,

Do you have a reference for this? It seems very high - what do they
need apart from Silicon, Silicon dioxide, and aluminium? Remember, if
we're using lunar resources, suitability for construction becomes more
important than efficiency.


I've got a report at home which I got from SSI that said 99% of the mass of
a SPS could be derived from lunar materials, assuming a design optimized for
this.

--

Regards,
Mike Combs
---


Neer seen any reports on it, but I've always felt that a Lunar
materials processing facility just made good sense.

Somebody needs to write a report on the "economics of gravity wells"
that politicians could understand.

Hmmph.

Seeing it written on the screen like that, I guess I see what's
wrong with the idea...


Ricahrd
  #22  
Old March 24th 04, 12:36 AM
Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Coal is Toxic - need SPS (part three and final until there is a reply)


"Sander Vesik" wrote in message
...
Joe Strout wrote:
In article ,


Hmm.. look at all the wrangling about whetever mobile phone towers are a
health hazzard or no. Now imagine the sma ething except with much higher
power density.


Most of the complains I've seen are about aesthetics. It's the cell phones
themselves next to the head that I've seen more people upset about.





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


--
Sander

+++ Out of cheese error +++



  #23  
Old March 24th 04, 09:12 AM
Alex Terrell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Coal is Toxic - need SPS

"Mike Combs" wrote in message ...
"Alex Terrell" wrote in message
om...

It has been estimated by SSI that only 10% of the mass of an SPS would

have
to come from Earth,

Do you have a reference for this? It seems very high - what do they
need apart from Silicon, Silicon dioxide, and aluminium? Remember, if
we're using lunar resources, suitability for construction becomes more
important than efficiency.


I've got a report at home which I got from SSI that said 99% of the mass of
a SPS could be derived from lunar materials, assuming a design optimized for
this.

Out of interest, does the report say what the 1% is? How long before
it could be manufactured in space?

(50 Tera Watts of capacity would weigh 500 million tons, so even 1%
would need 5 million tons launched. I assume however by the time we
get beyond 100 GW of capacity, almost everything will be buildable in
space).

Also, where does the report propose building the SSPS? at L4/L5 or in
GEO?


--


Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We should ask, critically and with appeal to the numbers, whether the
best site for a growing advancing industrial society is Earth, the
Moon, Mars, some other planet, or somewhere else entirely.
Surprisingly, the answer will be inescapable - the best site is
"somewhere else entirely."

Gerard O'Neill - "The High Frontier"

  #24  
Old March 24th 04, 06:27 PM
Mike Combs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Coal is Toxic - need SPS

"Alex Terrell" wrote in message
om...
"Mike Combs" wrote in message

...

I've got a report at home which I got from SSI that said 99% of the mass

of
a SPS could be derived from lunar materials, assuming a design optimized

for
this.

Out of interest, does the report say what the 1% is? How long before
it could be manufactured in space?


I think that report would be in a cardboard box buried in the garage
somewhere. Can't think of specifics off the top of my head, but it would be
the last few bits involving rare elements or advanced manufacturing
techniques. Probably stuff that we won't see coming out of space-based
factories for quite some number of years. But I'd say getting it down to 1%
is a pretty good accomplishment.

Also, where does the report propose building the SSPS? at L4/L5 or in
GEO?


In a High Earth Orbit about half-way to lunar orbit. Then completed
satellites would be sent down to GEO.

--


Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We should ask, critically and with appeal to the numbers, whether the
best site for a growing advancing industrial society is Earth, the
Moon, Mars, some other planet, or somewhere else entirely.
Surprisingly, the answer will be inescapable - the best site is
"somewhere else entirely."

Gerard O'Neill - "The High Frontier"


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Russians are designing new spacecraft Dr. O Policy 73 February 24th 04 08:00 PM
Never mind the shuttle crash, the real threat is the CAIB report Rand Simberg Space Shuttle 130 August 25th 03 06:53 PM
Never mind the shuttle crash, the real threat is the CAIB report Rand Simberg Policy 79 August 25th 03 06:53 PM
DEATH DOES NOT EXIST -- Coal Mine Rescue Proves It Ed Conrad Space Shuttle 4 August 2nd 03 01:00 AM
Death of the Theory of the Evolution of Man Chris Space Shuttle 11 July 7th 03 06:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.