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

The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 8th 10, 04:18 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet

On Nov 7, 5:38*pm, William Mook wrote:
There are about 10,000 large shipping vessels that carry a total of
1.1 billion dead weight tons. *This is about 110,000 tons each. *At
$200 million each this is a total infrastructure cost of $22
trillion. * These deliver 15 billion tons of cargo per year taking 45
days to cycle.

We are contemplating 16 million airships carrying 40 tons each - 0.64
billion dead weight tons - having a cycle time of 2.25 days delivering
delivering 140 billion tons of cargo per year - with far greater
flexibility than is possible with sea going ships. *If the same $22
trillion is allocated to these 16 million airships, we have a target
cost of $1.375 million per ship - in these quantities.


"We"

Can you be a little more specific as to who or whomever this "We"
represents?

Right for now it seems "We" = William Mook

~ BG
  #12  
Old November 8th 10, 04:24 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet

On Nov 7, 5:26*pm, William Mook wrote:
Earth as a planet means Earth treated as a single entity of production
and consumption. *Which stands in marked contrast to treating Earth as
a divided and fractious collection of 266 nations each on their own
geopolitical position defined by their access or not to resources and
defined by their ability to trick, cajole or force others to hand over
what they need at the expense of the rest.

It is clear that despite well defined limits and options we have not
made good decisions related to the development of energy resources on
this planet.

It is likely we have not made good decisions related to the
development of other primary resources as well.

So, its worth thinking of a goal and determining if this goal is at
all feasible!

It turns out that it may be!

8 billion millionaires is one place to start. *Its a well defined
target. *We find that to achieve this goal we need vastly more than is
currently being produced in terms of food, energy, wood, metals, and
so on.

When, we look at what the entire planet has to offer we find that we
have enough - surprisingly.

In the end, we look at the Earth as we might look at a space colony -
and we find that we have plenty of everything to go around - if we
trouble ourselves to invest in the most productive infrastructure
possible and apply it as broadly as possible leaving no one out.

When we do this we find that approximately 800,000 sq km of solar
collectors, 800,000 sq km of green houses in the desert, a few large
water works programs, and careful management of 800,000 sq km of Taiga
forest, combined with the development of a yet to be determined number
of deep sea trenches - connected together with space based
communications, space based navigation, space based sensing, and a
network of hydrogen filled hydrogen fueled UAV - creates a system that
achieves the initial target of 8 billion millionaires.

From the productivity of this asset we can see how our economy might
adopt it as a private public partnership - allocating what Ford calls
efficiency bonuses to workers, management, investors, government, and
buyers alike.


This is all well and good, except for the usual part where William
Mook does nothing.

Motivating poor folks to do whatever they can't possibly afford to
accomplish isn't exactly a working plan, and especially dysfunctional
if there's no actual leadership by anyone other than yourself. Do you
even have a short list of who would be put in charge of what, and have
any of them been contacted by you?

~ BG
  #13  
Old November 8th 10, 05:09 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet

On Nov 7, 7:47*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

We are contemplating 16 million airships carrying 40 tons each


Each one full of hydrogen gas, just like the Hindenberg...

--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
* * live in the real world." *
* * * * * * * * * * * -- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden


Not that Mook is always right about everything, because he's not
unless you'd care to take his word for most everything, but you really
need to get yourself educated past 4th grade and at least learn the
physics basics before flatulating again.

There's nothing unsafe about using pure hydrogen, because pure (95+%)
hydrogen doesn't burn. Put it this way, it's also a hell of a lot
safer than gasoline or even methane or worse yet is propane.

Secondly, don't expect Mook to ever back down, because he never does.
Not that you're any different.

~ BG
  #14  
Old November 8th 10, 07:55 AM posted to sci.space.policy
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet

On Nov 7, 8:40*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Brad Guth wrote:
On Nov 7, 7:47 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:


We are contemplating 16 million airships carrying 40 tons each


Each one full of hydrogen gas, just like the Hindenberg...


Not that Mook is always right about everything, because he's not
unless you'd care to take his word for most everything, but you really
need to get yourself educated past 4th grade and at least learn the
physics basics before flatulating again.


That's really QUITE funny! *You have no idea how funny that is.

You see, I really AM a 'rocket scientist'.



There's nothing unsafe about using pure hydrogen, because pure (95+%)
hydrogen doesn't burn. *Put it this way, it's also a hell of a lot
safer than gasoline or even methane or worse yet is propane.


Well, except for that slight problem with there being all that
surrounding air full of all that oxygen and stuff. *It doesn't take
much to get an explosive mixture of hydrogen in air. *All you need is
a slight leak into an internal compartment and any sort of spark or
flame.

I guess, given your guidance above with regard to 'pure hydrogen',
that this never happened:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFptg...eature=related



Secondly, don't expect Mook to ever back down, because he never does.


'Back down'? *Who cares? *He makes a Mookery of pretty much everything
he touches.

While you tend to just Guth things up.

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
*only stupid."
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * -- Heinrich Heine


Hydrogen vapor always goes vertical and otherwise expands. In fact,
there's nothing much stopping it from going vertical and expanding as
relatively failsafe.

I favor using nearly frozen or slush HTP (98+%) and a little bit of
something hydrocarbon for accomplishing the most easily stored energy
kick per volume, not that certain conditions of handling HTP are
exactly inert. Anytime you mess with terrific energy density, such as
HTP plus whatever else, there's a risk of something going terribly
wrong.

~ BG
  #15  
Old November 8th 10, 03:41 PM posted to sci.space.policy
Jim Davis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 420
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet

William Mook wrote:

We are contemplating 16 million airships carrying 40 tons each -
0.64 billion dead weight tons - having a cycle time of 2.25 days
delivering delivering 140 billion tons of cargo per year - with
far greater flexibility than is possible with sea going ships.


How long do you imagine it would take to build 16 million airships?

As a point of reference that's about 10 times the number of aircraft
built since the Wright brothers (100 years).

Building and keeping in service 16 million airships of the type you
describe is far, far beyond global industrial capacity.

Jim Davis
  #16  
Old November 8th 10, 05:56 PM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet


Here's what I found out about the Hindenberg;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHbaOX2UAs0

Time you caught up with reality Freddie.
  #17  
Old November 8th 10, 05:59 PM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet

Ah, I'm glad to see you two are friends at last.
  #18  
Old November 8th 10, 06:05 PM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet

As Jay Leno reported, the Hindenberg ignited not because of hydrogen
but because of the material that coated the surface of the balloon.
The magnesium struts didn't help either.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHbaOX2UAs0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXjVxOGCEpQ
  #19  
Old November 8th 10, 07:14 PM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet

On Nov 8, 9:41*am, Jim Davis wrote:
William Mook wrote:
We are contemplating 16 million airships carrying 40 tons each -
0.64 billion dead weight tons - having a cycle time of 2.25 days
delivering delivering 140 billion tons of cargo per year - with
far greater flexibility than is possible with sea going ships.


How long do you imagine it would take to build 16 million airships?


The supply chain will take five years to engineer. Five years to
build. Five years to produce the fleet. As I mentioned before.
This is a production rate of 1 airship every 10 seconds once in full-
scale production. This will take about 2,000,000 workers at 100
centers and total $190 billion in capital expense along with another
$3.2 billion in development cost. The cost of each airship will be
$800,000 out the door and another $600,000 will be spent over its
useful life which is estimated to be 10 years. Over that time it will
ship 73,000 tons of material at a cost of $20 per ton - a penny a
pound.

We will produce a factory that makes factories - largely unmanned
production cells - one per week - like Henry Kaiser produced aircraft
carriers. Over a two year period we will grow from 1 production cell
to 100 - and production rate will grow from 32,000 per year to 3.2
million per year.

As a point of reference that's about 10 times the number of aircraft
built since the Wright brothers (100 years).


True, but since we won't be building these airships using existing
infrastructure, this isn't relevant.

Besides, most of those aircraft you cite were built during World War 2
- which proves my point about supply chain because of the 1.5 million
aircraft built since 1903 over half were built in the period from 1939
to 1945

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_W...aft_production

The world in this 7 year period produced nearly 800,000 aircraft of
all types.

This shows that when production is organized, significant things can
be done relatively quickly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar...g_World_War_II

Look at aircraft carriers produced by the Allies. Note the vast
difference Henry Kaiser played in aircraft carrier production for the
Allies. His Vancouver shipyard produced its first Aircraft Carrier in
April 1943. He produced 50 carriers in less than a year! That's 3x
more than all the Axis powers put together. Throughout the war
Kaiser's dry docks and shipyards put out 140 major ships.

Now consider Automobile production figures before Henry Ford's supply
chain innovations and after Henry Ford's supply chain innovations.

Henry Ford organized an assembly line and outproduced all other
manufacturers at vastly less cost than anyone else - notwithstanding
the low levels of production and high prices before that time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Au...uction_Figures

From 1899 through 1901 there were fewer than 700 automobiles produced
per year. Five years later Ford alone produced over 8,700 cars and
the industry nearly 20,000 copying his methods. Ten years after that
Ford produced over 500,000 cars and industry copying many of his
methods produced nearly 200,000 more. By 1923 Ford alone produced
over 1.8 million cars and the rest of the industry produced another
million.

This vast increase in the rate of production reflected the rate of
investment in new productive techniques and new supply chains.

Building and keeping in service 16 million airships of the type you
describe is far, far beyond global industrial capacity.


That is correct. To produce this many airships in five years and
maintain them over 10 years and produce replacements over that time
will require investment in a supply chain designed to achieve this
end. The present industrial supply chain is not organized to produce
vehicles of this type on this scale. Its a classic make-buy strategy
favoring make. The same supply chain that produces the vehicles will
make parts and maintain them and produce replacement vehicles
recycling parts and materiel from retired vehicles.


Jim Davis


  #20  
Old November 8th 10, 07:38 PM posted to sci.space.policy
William Mook[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,840
Default The First Step in Creating a Space Age - Treat Earth as a Planet

On Nov 7, 10:24*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Nov 7, 5:26*pm, William Mook wrote:



Earth as a planet means Earth treated as a single entity of production
and consumption. *Which stands in marked contrast to treating Earth as
a divided and fractious collection of 266 nations each on their own
geopolitical position defined by their access or not to resources and
defined by their ability to trick, cajole or force others to hand over
what they need at the expense of the rest.


It is clear that despite well defined limits and options we have not
made good decisions related to the development of energy resources on
this planet.


It is likely we have not made good decisions related to the
development of other primary resources as well.


So, its worth thinking of a goal and determining if this goal is at
all feasible!


It turns out that it may be!


8 billion millionaires is one place to start. *Its a well defined
target. *We find that to achieve this goal we need vastly more than is
currently being produced in terms of food, energy, wood, metals, and
so on.


When, we look at what the entire planet has to offer we find that we
have enough - surprisingly.


In the end, we look at the Earth as we might look at a space colony -
and we find that we have plenty of everything to go around - if we
trouble ourselves to invest in the most productive infrastructure
possible and apply it as broadly as possible leaving no one out.


When we do this we find that approximately 800,000 sq km of solar
collectors, 800,000 sq km of green houses in the desert, a few large
water works programs, and careful management of 800,000 sq km of Taiga
forest, combined with the development of a yet to be determined number
of deep sea trenches - connected together with space based
communications, space based navigation, space based sensing, and a
network of hydrogen filled hydrogen fueled UAV - creates a system that
achieves the initial target of 8 billion millionaires.


From the productivity of this asset we can see how our economy might
adopt it as a private public partnership - allocating what Ford calls
efficiency bonuses to workers, management, investors, government, and
buyers alike.


This is all well and good, except for the usual part where William
Mook does nothing.

Motivating poor folks to do whatever they can't possibly afford to
accomplish isn't exactly a working plan, and especially dysfunctional
if there's no actual leadership by anyone other than yourself. *Do you
even have a short list of who would be put in charge of what, and have
any of them been contacted by you?

*~ BG


The 10 million millionaires have $40 trillion. With the collapse of
the US banking system and the imminent unraveling of the US monetary
system they're looking for a place to put their money. A few billion
to build a 'production cell' that puts all the pieces together is the
first step. Then, building a factory that makes factories to make the
things we need to live. Like I said;

Five Years to Engineer and Develop
Five Years to build the supply chain
Five Years to build the products

We start with 1 cell and grow it 100x over three years by building a
production cell per year - of each type needed to support the supply
chain.

 




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
mechanism for creating water in space discovered Yousuf Khan[_2_] Astronomy Misc 12 September 17th 10 08:09 PM
NASA Takes Giant Step Toward Finding Earth-Like Planets [email protected] News 0 September 30th 05 04:48 PM
Earth & Space Week 2005: Celebrating our Planet While Reaching for the Stars Jacques van Oene News 0 February 1st 05 03:46 PM
old BBC review: Planet Earth From Space ErstWhile Amateur Astronomy 0 June 23rd 04 06:21 PM
Space Engineering Helps Drill Better Holes In Planet Earth Ron Baalke Technology 0 July 18th 03 07:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.