...The Greatest Weakness of America!

Mike Combs wrote:
"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message
...
Jonathan wrote:

Is there any doubt that solar energy from space is the ultimate
solution to the energy needs of the planet?
Lots of doubts. Just covering the US deserts with solar thermal power
stations will produce similar amounts of power for a lot less money.

What do you mean by "similar amounts of power"? Similar to what you'd get
from a GEO ring full of SPS? Obviously another big advantage of SPS over
ground-based solar is that the limits to growth are much more distant.


As the Wikipedia puts it

A 1996 estimate[13] for the production of 5 billion watts (equivalent to
five large nuclear power plants) would require several square km of solar
collectors (weighing approximately 5 million kg) and an earth-based
antenna 5 miles in diameter.

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

Think how much direct power a collector 5 miles in diameter can correct.

Note: 5 miles is 8045 metres
Current solar panels can collect 300 watts per square metre

Building one thing in a desert is a lot cheaper than building a machine
of the same size in same place the same desert plus a large machine in
orbit.

SSP do not transmit power to cities full of people but to the same empty
deserts,

SPS would not necessarily have to transmit to deserts. Unlike PV arrays,
rectennas would allow sunlight and rainfall through, thus they might reside
over the top of farmland or grazing land.

But for that matter, most coal-fired power plants do not reside in the
hearts of large cites, so it's a bit of a silly objection.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 01:38:00 -0000, BradGuth
wrote:

On Jul 19, 6:30 pm, (Richard Casady)
wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:53:11 -0600, Joe Strout wrote:
I doubt ethanol will ever turn out to be very useful as a fuel

If you mean it will not be available in sufficient quanty, I think you
are right. It does make a dandy 100 octane fuel that will produce
more power than gasoline. My sprint car is set up for methanol, but
ethanol is just as good. You have to reset the fuel injection. Mileage
will be half of what you can get on gasoline.

Casady

Why not add a tank of h2o2, and go like hell?

Against the rules. As it is a sprinter will sometimes pull a wheelie
coming out of the corners at 90+ MPH. More than 800 hp, less than 1200
pounds. You understand, all this is on dirt, a half mile oval. Go
fast, turn left. Keep the pedal on the floor all the way around and
turn laps in the neighborhood of sixteen seconds. You can do a race in
about two minutes.

Casady

"BradGuth" wrote
On Jul 19, 6:30 pm, (Richard Casady)
wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:53:11 -0600, Joe Strout wrote:
I doubt ethanol will ever turn out to be very useful as a fuel

If you mean it will not be available in sufficient quanty, I think you
are right. It does make a dandy 100 octane fuel that will produce
more power than gasoline. My sprint car is set up for methanol, but
ethanol is just as good. You have to reset the fuel injection. Mileage
will be half of what you can get on gasoline.

Casady

Why not add a tank of h2o2, and go like hell?

H2O2 is instable and decays to H2O and O2 gas.
I think, you won't like H2O in your tank, nor won't you like
to see it bursting. ;-)

On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:23:56 GMT, h (Rand
Simberg) wrote, in part:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:27:57 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

I've seen such panic situations with my own eyes
several times, as i live in Miami. Trust me when I say
when the day comes the world realizes the oil party
is over, it'll all come crashing down ....overnight.

Not a steady decline, but in a panic.

Nonsense. "Peak oil" is a myth. We have huge reserves in shale and
tar sands, which become economically viable at prices below the
current ones.

I would think, though, that any method of producing oil that has
higher production costs than those faced by the Saudis, and which
*also* requires a major capital investment, is inherently nonviable
(for private enterprise).

Because the Saudis can always undercut it.

The government can, however, carry out such projects directly, because
the taxpayer benefits from lower Saudi oil prices even if a facility
for heavy oil upgrading, or coal gasification, never produces a drop
of fuel.

I definitely think that while solar power satellites may be nice,
they're not the only way to go. Nuclear power plants are something we
can already build.

John Savard

On Jul 17, 1:02 pm, Talk-n-Dog wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 17, 12:20 am, "Peter Muehlbauer"
wrote:
"Jonathan" wrote

I'm stating the obvious when I claim it's our dependence
on fossil fuels.
[snip]

There is no more Peak Oil.

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,490207,00.html
(maybe this is somewhere in english too, didn't look for it)

Off shore of South East Asia more and more natural gas and oil is
discovered.
The lucky one is Vietnam, where the fields stretch like a carpet
from north to south, among them a supergiant field like in
Saudi Arabia.
...
From probe boreholes at Sihanoukville Chevron found oil with
4 of 5 boreholes. Chevron calls this significant.
They estimate 500 billion barrels of oil within 6 fields, and that's
only the beginning.

Royal Dutch Shell is drilling off shore from Sabah, wherefrom starting
to convey 350 billion barrels at coming autumn.

Vietnam opens up 3 new blocks of about 700 billion barrels in the
Cuu-Long bassin and JapanVietnam Pertoleum discovers another
field with 37 billion barrels.

The supergiant field however is located in the Song-Hong bassin
with an estimated volume of 5 trillion barrels.

The Vietnam war was in fact all about the taking of their oil, and
nothing else. I kid you not.
-
Brad Guth

That one worked so well, that we decided to do it again?
It'd be easier to buy camels and right-off the oil

--
An ignorant person is one who doesn't know what you have just found out

http://OutSourcedNews.com

The problem with the global warming theory, is that theories are like a
bowl of ice-cream, it only takes a little dab of **** to ruin the whole
thing.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's trus, and certain groups of us do not use 1% of our fair share
of oil as is. I wonder what the big secret is?
-
Brad Guth

On Jul 19, 6:28 pm, BradGuth wrote:
We Americans obviously need all the spare energy we can muster, and
thus far dead Muslims are not exactly accomplishing that task.

Just wondering, what's an H2O2 fart worth these days?

Once again, the dyslexic village idiot has to inform the Yiddish all-
knowing wizard of Oz.

H2O2 is actually the best of hydrogen energy on steroids, along with a
little of whatever is offering the most ICE bang per kg that's
delivering extremely little CO2 and essentially zilch worth of NOx.

On Jul 17, 5:16 pm, "Mark Test" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message

roups.com... The Yids and of their Third Reich of a global domination mindset
really don't care, as otherwise multiple renewable alternatives would
have been established as of decades ago.

Really? Cite? What can power an internal combustion engine
more efficient than gasoline, for the same or less cost?

H2O2 + a little whatever else you'd like to get rid of. Somewhat like
having to cite them regular old laws of physics, plus a little
something of well established science duh-101.

BTW, my cost and environmental impact factors are birth to grave all-
inclusive. How about your's?

Wind and solar energy are not going away anytime soon, and a tower of
renewable power footprint that's offering a clean and otherwise
perfectly safe energy density of 40 kw/m2 is not even rocket science
(more like physics duh-101). With some honest R&D applied effort, I
do believe this energy tower foundation or footprint of energy density
can reach 50 kw/m2.

How many megatonnes of nearly pure h2o2 per year would you mother
Earth raping and otherwise toxic soot producing folks like?

It seems as though 100 megatonnes should more than do the trick to
start off with (on behalf of sustaining roughly 100 million drivers
per day gives us 5.5 kg of h2o2 per average car, SUV or whatever
truck, otherwise 11 kg per average if there's merely 50 million active
drivers per day).

How would you folks like having a clean 1000 shp(746 kw, metric 735.5
kw) under the hood of your hybrid Hummer H2, with that nifty road
machine hardly contributing all that much CO2 and otherwise zilch
worth of NOx. (I can do this)
-
Brad Guth

Hmmmmmm, 100 megatonnes of h2o2 per year must be another taboo,
especially since it's made from water and the spare/surplus of clean
renewable energy that's mostly wind and solar, but then tidal energy
could add perhaps another 10~25% bonus of spot energy that actually
storable for peak demand in the form of vertical sea water.

Too bad that it's all too complicated for the American dumbfounded
mindset that already knows all there is to know about the taking of
energy from others, and otherwise of controlling which energy gets to
whomever we decide is worthy enough, and at the price we establish now
that Saddam is out of the way.

Perhaps Canada is hiding WMD.
- Brad Guth

Jonathan wrote:
I'm stating the obvious when I claim it's our dependence
on fossil fuels.

But what I think few understand is just how quickly
the world oil market could collapse. Do you realize
that OPEC bases its annual oil production quotas
partially on the estimated reserves a member
country claims?

Which means a country can pump more oil each
year if it claims larger reserves in the ground.

It's been documented that many OPEC countries have
over estimated their reserves by as much as 50%.
How much do we trust the stated oil reserves
of countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Nigeria, Russia
Kuwait and Venezuela?

"How Credible Are Proven Oil Reserves:"
The Case of Iran, Russia & Canada

"Among the principal beneficiaries of these revisions are Iran whose proven
reserves have gone up from 89.7 bb at the beginning of 2003 to130.7 bb in
2004 and then to 132.5 bb in 2005 and Russia from 48.6 bb to 69.1 bb and
then to 72.3 bb at a time when no major discoveries were reported in
these two countries in 2003 or 2004."
http://www.odac-info.org/assessments...5thNAEConf.pdf

MIDDLE EAST OIL - REALITY AND ILLUSION

"In 1985, Kuwait added 50% to its reported reserves although nothing
particular had changed in the oilfield. Three years later, Venezuela doubled
its reserves by the inclusion of long-known but not previously counted,
heavy oil reserves. That forced Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Iran and Iraq to
retaliate with massive increases to protect their OPEC quota, which
was based partly on reserves. Saudi Arabia followed in 1990 increasing
its reported reserves from 170 Gb to 257.5 Gb, an estimate that has
barely changed since, despite intervening production of some 37 Gb."
http://www.peakoil.net/Publications/...D_ILLUSION.pdf


..................................................


It's easy to assume that when oil finally does begin
running out, that the decline will be steady and
predictable over a number of years.

But think about that for a moment. Has anyone
ever been in a city the moment it becomes clear
a hurricane is going to hit? That city goes from
a normally functioning well supplied operation
to being completely wiped out of all cash, gas
and food in .....THREE HOURS FLAT!

I've seen such panic situations with my own eyes
several times, as i live in Miami. Trust me when I say
when the day comes the world realizes the oil party
is over, it'll all come crashing down ....overnight.

Not a steady decline, but in a panic.

One day they'll be some news event, some story that gets
everyones attention. Such as how Hurricane Katrina
has galvanized the global warming movement.
And everything will change overnight.

Maybe another story like this will come out, except
about the Saudi oil fields.........

"Mexico's Cantarell oil field, the world's second largest producer,
is beginning to dry up"
http://www.scdigest.com/assets/newsV...&ctype=content


Or maybe a story like this...........

"It was an incredible revelation last week that the second largest
oil field in the world is exhausted and past its peak output.
Yet that is what the Kuwait Oil Company revealed about
its Burgan field."
http://www.ameinfo.com/71519.html


Countries will start hording instead of pumping when that
Katrina-like event occurs.
Everyone /at once/ will keep what they have for
themselves and bunker down.

If America is not ready for that day, our country
could become a ghost of its former self in the
blink of an eye.

Did you know George Bush cancelled an ambitious
NASA Space Solar Power program, which could ultimately
lead to the US becoming the energy "King" of the future?
And replaced that program with another moon shot?

More ...moon rocks... instead of ensuring our future?

During the next Presidential election, we need to demand
the wasteful return to the moon be 'aborted' and this program
below be ....reinstated.

This is the path to replacing fossil fuels for the long term.
It's the path to a bright future for America.
It's the path to end global warming.
And an end to a future where Islam dominates us all.

Let's make America the next energy "Saudi Arabia".


Executive Summary
NASA'S SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAM
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309075971

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Space Solar Power (SSP)
Exploratory Research and Technology (SERT) program was charged to develop
technologies needed to provide cost-competitive ground baseload electrical
power from space-based solar energy converters.


The SERT program was established in FY 1999 and continued through FY 2000 by
U.S. congressional appropriation. An additional appropriation was also
funded for SSP Research and Technology (SSP R&T) for FY 2001. Decisions on
internal NASA budget allocations for FY 2002 were pending during review and
publication of this report.


The program has identified several flight demonstration milestones in order
to test technologies and concepts in the near-term and mid-term in
preparation for transferring the technologies to industry for final
full-scale development and implementation. A more specific treatment of
these flight demonstrations and key program milestones can be found
in Section 2-1.

The program has identified an investment portfolio for a future SSP program
with planned resource allocation through 2016 (see Table D-l).
Technology flight demonstrations (referred to by NASA as MSCs) are
scheduled in FY 2006-2007, FY 2011-2012, and FY 2016.

From 2002 to 2006 the funding request for SSP was respectively

$88million
$124million
$211million
$282million
$312million
..................................................


"Chairman Rohrabacher opened the hearing by stating that
space solar power (SSP) is "precisely what NASA as an
agency should be all about" - He stated that NASA's lack
of preparation to follow up on SSP, a concept that, he claimed,
"cries out for further research," may be because NASA wants
to focus on human space flight, "in hopes of reclaiming the
glory days of Apollo." He wants NASA to take the next measured
step in research, and believes that this visionary approach would
reap huge public support for NASA ."

Hearing on "Space Solar Power: A Fresh Look" before the
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics of the House
Committee on Science, October 24, 1997.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/legaff/solar.html


Space Solar Power
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_solar_power

Space Solar Power Concept And Technology Maturation Program
Nasa Glenn Research Center
http://space-power.grc.nasa.gov/ppo/publications/sctm/

Pentagon Considering Study on Space-Based Solar Power
Thursday, April 12, 2007
By Jeremy Singer
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,265380,00.html

MIT Space Solar Power Workshop
http://web.mit.edu/space_solar_power/


s

You may not be avare of what Germany did during WW2. But after the
loss of the Ploesty oilfields capture by the Red Army, they managed to
find a new source for petrol/gas on theyr tanks and planes. Now, this
is fact not fiction. What were the Germans able to do? They refined
gas/petrol out of coal. It can be done, its expensive but there is
enough coal to last next 3 - 400 years, according to current use and
at least 100 years with greatly expanded use.

Cheers, Einar

Jonathan wrote:
I'm stating the obvious when I claim it's our dependence
on fossil fuels.

But what I think few understand is just how quickly
the world oil market could collapse. Do you realize
that OPEC bases its annual oil production quotas
partially on the estimated reserves a member
country claims?

Which means a country can pump more oil each
year if it claims larger reserves in the ground.

It's been documented that many OPEC countries have
over estimated their reserves by as much as 50%.
How much do we trust the stated oil reserves
of countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Nigeria, Russia
Kuwait and Venezuela?

"How Credible Are Proven Oil Reserves:"
The Case of Iran, Russia & Canada

"Among the principal beneficiaries of these revisions are Iran whose proven
reserves have gone up from 89.7 bb at the beginning of 2003 to130.7 bb in
2004 and then to 132.5 bb in 2005 and Russia from 48.6 bb to 69.1 bb and
then to 72.3 bb at a time when no major discoveries were reported in
these two countries in 2003 or 2004."
http://www.odac-info.org/assessments...5thNAEConf.pdf

MIDDLE EAST OIL - REALITY AND ILLUSION

"In 1985, Kuwait added 50% to its reported reserves although nothing
particular had changed in the oilfield. Three years later, Venezuela doubled
its reserves by the inclusion of long-known but not previously counted,
heavy oil reserves. That forced Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Iran and Iraq to
retaliate with massive increases to protect their OPEC quota, which
was based partly on reserves. Saudi Arabia followed in 1990 increasing
its reported reserves from 170 Gb to 257.5 Gb, an estimate that has
barely changed since, despite intervening production of some 37 Gb."
http://www.peakoil.net/Publications/...D_ILLUSION.pdf


..................................................


It's easy to assume that when oil finally does begin
running out, that the decline will be steady and
predictable over a number of years.

But think about that for a moment. Has anyone
ever been in a city the moment it becomes clear
a hurricane is going to hit? That city goes from
a normally functioning well supplied operation
to being completely wiped out of all cash, gas
and food in .....THREE HOURS FLAT!

I've seen such panic situations with my own eyes
several times, as i live in Miami. Trust me when I say
when the day comes the world realizes the oil party
is over, it'll all come crashing down ....overnight.

Not a steady decline, but in a panic.

One day they'll be some news event, some story that gets
everyones attention. Such as how Hurricane Katrina
has galvanized the global warming movement.
And everything will change overnight.

Maybe another story like this will come out, except
about the Saudi oil fields.........

"Mexico's Cantarell oil field, the world's second largest producer,
is beginning to dry up"
http://www.scdigest.com/assets/newsV...&ctype=content


Or maybe a story like this...........

"It was an incredible revelation last week that the second largest
oil field in the world is exhausted and past its peak output.
Yet that is what the Kuwait Oil Company revealed about
its Burgan field."
http://www.ameinfo.com/71519.html


Countries will start hording instead of pumping when that
Katrina-like event occurs.
Everyone /at once/ will keep what they have for
themselves and bunker down.

If America is not ready for that day, our country
could become a ghost of its former self in the
blink of an eye.

Did you know George Bush cancelled an ambitious
NASA Space Solar Power program, which could ultimately
lead to the US becoming the energy "King" of the future?
And replaced that program with another moon shot?

More ...moon rocks... instead of ensuring our future?

During the next Presidential election, we need to demand
the wasteful return to the moon be 'aborted' and this program
below be ....reinstated.

This is the path to replacing fossil fuels for the long term.
It's the path to a bright future for America.
It's the path to end global warming.
And an end to a future where Islam dominates us all.

Let's make America the next energy "Saudi Arabia".


Executive Summary
NASA'S SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAM
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309075971

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Space Solar Power (SSP)
Exploratory Research and Technology (SERT) program was charged to develop
technologies needed to provide cost-competitive ground baseload electrical
power from space-based solar energy converters.


The SERT program was established in FY 1999 and continued through FY 2000 by
U.S. congressional appropriation. An additional appropriation was also
funded for SSP Research and Technology (SSP R&T) for FY 2001. Decisions on
internal NASA budget allocations for FY 2002 were pending during review and
publication of this report.


The program has identified several flight demonstration milestones in order
to test technologies and concepts in the near-term and mid-term in
preparation for transferring the technologies to industry for final
full-scale development and implementation. A more specific treatment of
these flight demonstrations and key program milestones can be found
in Section 2-1.

The program has identified an investment portfolio for a future SSP program
with planned resource allocation through 2016 (see Table D-l).
Technology flight demonstrations (referred to by NASA as MSCs) are
scheduled in FY 2006-2007, FY 2011-2012, and FY 2016.

From 2002 to 2006 the funding request for SSP was respectively

$88million
$124million
$211million
$282million
$312million
..................................................


"Chairman Rohrabacher opened the hearing by stating that
space solar power (SSP) is "precisely what NASA as an
agency should be all about" - He stated that NASA's lack
of preparation to follow up on SSP, a concept that, he claimed,
"cries out for further research," may be because NASA wants
to focus on human space flight, "in hopes of reclaiming the
glory days of Apollo." He wants NASA to take the next measured
step in research, and believes that this visionary approach would
reap huge public support for NASA ."

Hearing on "Space Solar Power: A Fresh Look" before the
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics of the House
Committee on Science, October 24, 1997.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/legaff/solar.html


Space Solar Power
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_solar_power

Space Solar Power Concept And Technology Maturation Program
Nasa Glenn Research Center
http://space-power.grc.nasa.gov/ppo/publications/sctm/

Pentagon Considering Study on Space-Based Solar Power
Thursday, April 12, 2007
By Jeremy Singer
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,265380,00.html

MIT Space Solar Power Workshop
http://web.mit.edu/space_solar_power/




There's an in depth review of all this Aug. 24, 2007
on 'The Jerry Springer Show'.

"BradGuth" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 17, 5:23 am, (Rand Simberg)
wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:27:57 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

I've seen such panic situations with my own eyes
several times, as i live in Miami. Trust me when I say
when the day comes the world realizes the oil party
is over, it'll all come crashing down ....overnight.

Not a steady decline, but in a panic.

Nonsense. "Peak oil" is a myth. We have huge reserves in shale and
tar sands, which become economically viable at prices below the
current ones.

At $100+ per barrel, there's oil in most anything.


Continuing to rely on fossil fuels means energy costs
will steadily continue rising over time, while also dramatically
increasing greenhouse emissions as third world countries
rapidly industrialize.

Space Solar Power would reverse those trends and
provide ever cheaper and cleaner energy as time goes
on and the program evolves.

The difference in our future between these two choices
are like night and day. Or like that between post-apocalyptic
nightmares, and Trekkian dreams of unlimited energy, peace
and social justice abundant renewable energy makes possible.

Not to mention, at $100 plus per barrel, our economy goes
into recession or worse, while our standard of living gets
shipped overseas. And the Islamic countries reap windwall profits
that'll give them a frightening level of power over us.

Ya right, let's do nothing about fossil fuels, just continue on in denial.
And some day, Islamic extremism and suicide bombings will be
a way of life for everyone. Letting the extremists reduce the world
to the tenth century is another way of solving the energy crisis
I suppose.

I say we should solve this problem, I don't like their solution.




At $1000/barrel we can make oil out of gems. Otherwise human bodies
can be processed into oil.

What's the BTU rating of a good Muslim, or via most anything other
that's alive and kicking?
-
Brad Guth

"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message
...
Mike Combs wrote:
"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message
...
Jonathan wrote:

Is there any doubt that solar energy from space is the ultimate
solution to the energy needs of the planet?
Lots of doubts. Just covering the US deserts with solar thermal power
stations will produce similar amounts of power for a lot less money.

What do you mean by "similar amounts of power"? Similar to what you'd
get
from a GEO ring full of SPS? Obviously another big advantage of SPS
over
ground-based solar is that the limits to growth are much more distant.


As the Wikipedia puts it

A 1996 estimate[13] for the production of 5 billion watts (equivalent to
five large nuclear power plants) would require several square km of solar
collectors (weighing approximately 5 million kg) and an earth-based
antenna 5 miles in diameter.

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

Think how much direct power a collector 5 miles in diameter can correct.

Note: 5 miles is 8045 metres
Current solar panels can collect 300 watts per square metre

Building one thing in a desert is a lot cheaper than building a machine
of the same size in same place the same desert plus a large machine in
orbit.


From what I've read, it'll be lasers that ultimately transmit
the power to earth, with imagined rectenna size as small
as three meters....the size of a car. We've spent very little
on research, and yet they envision having the ability
to turn power on and off like they do a cell phone today.
http://space-power.grc.nasa.gov/ppo/...eaming_TIM.pdf


Someday every car etc will be powered directly from orbit.
And if we're smart, the bills will all be made payable to...

.....US POWER CORP!!!


With virtually no substantial research money spent to date, it
boggles the mind what researchers already imagine is possible.
What would they come up if they were given a military-like budget
and an urgent mandate?





SSP do not transmit power to cities full of people but to the same
empty
deserts,

SPS would not necessarily have to transmit to deserts. Unlike PV
arrays,
rectennas would allow sunlight and rainfall through, thus they might
reside
over the top of farmland or grazing land.

But for that matter, most coal-fired power plants do not reside in the
hearts of large cites, so it's a bit of a silly objection.