Only NIXON Could Go To China!

Only President Bush could sell Space Solar Power.



Space Solar Power Home
http://spacesolarpower.nasa.gov/


On many of the Sunday morning news shows the question
was "what is the government going to do about oil prices'?
The answers were CARB standards, tax breaks and such.
But the answers were really "I don't know" or "nothing".

But that is the wrong question, an old-fashioned one.
It should be "What are WE going to do about it"?

In this new-connected world WE lead and governments follow.
That is our future.

The world is what we make it.

But there's one thing we must do first before we can
secure our own future, and Right this World.
Something even a child can do.




Audio mp3 delivered by Peter Finch
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/Movi...hnetwork2.html


Program Director: Take 2, Cue Howard.


"I don't have to tell you things are bad.
Everyone knows things are bad.
It's a depression, everybody's out of
work, or scared of losing their job.
The dollar buys a nickels worth, banks
are going bust, shopkeepers keep a gun
under the counters, punks are running wild in
the streets, and nobody anywhere seems to know what
to do about it, and there's no end to it.

We know our air is unfit to breathe and our food
is unfit to eat. We sit watching our tv's while some
local newscaster tells us that today we had 15 homicides and
63 violent crimes as if that's the way it's supposed to be.
We know things are bad, worse than bad, they're crazy.
It's like everything everywhere is going crazy so we don't
go out anymore. We sit in the house and slowly the world
we're living in is getting smaller and all we say is
...please.... at least leave us alone in our living rooms.
Let me have my toaster and my tv and my steel belted radials
and I won't say anything.

Just leave us alone.

Well I'm not going to leave you alone, I want you to get
mad. I don't want you to protest, I don't want you to
riot, I don't want you to write to your congressman
because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write.
I don't know what to do about the depression and the
inflation and the Russians and the crime in the streets.
All I know is that first you got to get mad, you've
got to say

I'M A HUMAN BEING GODDAMMIT
MY LIFE HAS VALUE!


So ...I want you... to get up now... I want all of you to get
up out of your chairs...I want all of you to get up right
now and go to the window, open it and stick your head
out and yell...

I'M AS MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE
THIS ANYMORE

I want to get to get up right now, get up go to your
windows open them and stick your head out and yell.....


I'M AS MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE
THIS ANYMORE

Things have gotta change, but first you've gotta get mad, you've
gotta yell....

I'M AS MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE
THIS ANYMORE

Then we'll figure out what to do about the inflation and the
depression and the oil crisis. But first get up out of your
chairs, open the window stick your head out and yell and
say...

I'M AS MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE
THIS ANYMORE

Stick your head out of the window, open it and stick your
head out and keep yelling and yell...

I'M AS MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE
THIS ANYMORE

Just get up from your chairs, right now, go to the window, let
everybody know it's your window, open it and stick your
head out yell and keep yelling....


I'M AS MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE
THIS ANYMORE

I'M AS MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE
THIS ANYMORE

I'M AS MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE
THIS ANYMORE






s

jonathan wrote:
Only President Bush could sell Space Solar Power.



Space Solar Power Home
http://spacesolarpower.nasa.gov/


On many of the Sunday morning news shows the question
was "what is the government going to do about oil prices'?
The answers were CARB standards, tax breaks and such.
But the answers were really "I don't know" or "nothing".


Of course, powersats produce electricity, not oil.
And oil isn't used to make significant amounts of
electricity in the US.

If you want to electrify transit, we can do that
without SPS.

So you're just engaging in emotion-laden empty-headed
blather here.

Paul

"Paul F. Dietz" wrote in message
...
jonathan wrote:
Only President Bush could sell Space Solar Power.



Space Solar Power Home
http://spacesolarpower.nasa.gov/


On many of the Sunday morning news shows the question
was "what is the government going to do about oil prices'?
The answers were CARB standards, tax breaks and such.
But the answers were really "I don't know" or "nothing".


Of course, powersats produce electricity, not oil.
And oil isn't used to make significant amounts of
electricity in the US.


Excuse me! Looks like about two thirds of our electricity
come from fossil fuels.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electri...tablees1b.html


If you want to electrify transit, we can do that
without SPS.


Excuse me! If we want to electrify the auto industry where
do you think that power would come from??? From the
same power plants that use mostly fossil fuels.



So you're just engaging in emotion-laden empty-headed
blather here.


I guess you don't read the news much. Energy costs have
gone up forty percent this year alone. And are still rising.
What about ten or twenty years from now, when countries
like China and India are using five or ten times the energy
they are now?

Are you saying the current energy situation is sustainable?

Please remove your head from the sand and look down the
road a bit. What do ...you...see?




Paul

Paul F. Dietz wrote:

jonathan wrote:

Only President Bush could sell Space Solar Power.

Space Solar Power Home
http://spacesolarpower.nasa.gov/

On many of the Sunday morning news shows the question
was "what is the government going to do about oil prices'?
The answers were CARB standards, tax breaks and such.
But the answers were really "I don't know" or "nothing".



Of course, powersats produce electricity, not oil.
And oil isn't used to make significant amounts of
electricity in the US.

If you want to electrify transit, we can do that
without SPS.

Well, a lot of US electrical power does come from coal, so solar power
plants would reduce air pollution and CO2 from those plants. But you
would to deal with the coal companies and their lobbyists somehow.

So you're just engaging in emotion-laden empty-headed
blather here.

Paul

Agree to a certain extent. I have never understood why some people
think orbiting solar power facilities are viable, even with "cheap"
access to space. I just can't how the cost of putting a solar plant in
orbit and beaming the power back to Earth for 24 hours a day of solar
can complete with the 3 to 5 hours of solar power you get on average
with a rooftop installation.

Sure, it is not a continuous 24 hour of input power, but if you put
enough energy storage capacity and enough solar panels into the earth
based system, you have enough to use for 24 hours and even days on end
for cloudy periods. More viable in the more southern climates, true.
Still the cost factor or putting a giant solar power system in orbit
even with cheap access to space is likely to be far more than the cost
of an earth based system for the same amount of solar power produced.

Besides as an amateur astronomer, the thought of a swarm of bright
giant satellites orbiting the Earth is dismaying. Getting hard enough to
see stuff in the sky already.

Alan F.

jonathan wrote:

Of course, powersats produce electricity, not oil.
And oil isn't used to make significant amounts of
electricity in the US.

Excuse me! Looks like about two thirds of our electricity
come from fossil fuels.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electri...tablees1b.html

Uh huh. And that's primarily coal and natural gas, not oil.

If you want to electrify transit, we can do that
without SPS.

Excuse me! If we want to electrify the auto industry where
do you think that power would come from??? From the
same power plants that use mostly fossil fuels.

Uh huh. Which would be coal and natural gas, not oil.

Of course, it would make more sense to turn the coal
into liquid fuels for direct use in cars. The barrier
to electrification of transit is not lack of electricity,
it's that electricity is poorly suited to many forms
of transit. So how is SPS supposed to help here?

I now imagine you proposing that SPS will help stave off
an imagined impending coal shortage, so that could be used for
liquid fuels. If you do that, I will laught at you,
since the US has many centuries of coal left, and because
nuclear could do that just as well.


I guess you don't read the news much. Energy costs have
gone up forty percent this year alone. And are still rising.
What about ten or twenty years from now, when countries
like China and India are using five or ten times the energy
they are now?

Are you saying the current energy situation is sustainable?

I'm saying you're engaging in embarrassing and foolish
erercises in ignorance and lapses in logic.

Paul

Are you saying the current energy situation is sustainable?

I'm saying you're engaging in embarrassing and foolish
erercises in ignorance and lapses in logic.

Then so did the authors of "Advanced Technology Paths to Global Climate
Stability: Energy for a Greenhouse Planet" (Science, Vol 298, Issue
5595, 981-987, 1 November 2002). Assuming the use of breeder reactors
and of all available fissile material (except for that contained in
seawater because it is infeasible to recover), and eschewing significant
increases in fossil fuels to avoid causing un-acceptable global warming,
they estimate that only space-based Solar power will be able to meet
Earth's power needs by the end of the Century. Note: Earth, not the
United States alone.

Liquid hydrocarbon fuels are of course excellent for vehicles. These
can be manufactured in a greenhouse-neutral way by using hydrogen from
electrolysis and carbon from atmospheric CO2.

Some (curiously, even some environmentalists) say this would be too
expensive. It's certainly less expensive than letting the Earth go to
greenhouse hell.

In article ,
afiggatt wrote:
...I just can't how the cost of putting a solar plant in
orbit and beaming the power back to Earth for 24 hours a day of solar
can complete with the 3 to 5 hours of solar power you get on average
with a rooftop installation.

Easily: it's there all the time, independent of night and weather.

There are some lesser issues as well, but that's the big one.

Sure, it is not a continuous 24 hour of input power, but if you put
enough energy storage capacity and enough solar panels into the earth
based system, you have enough to use for 24 hours and even days on end
for cloudy periods.

Unfortunately, that's a big "if". Energy storage -- especially in bulk,
on the scale needed for industrial uses -- is *very* costly.

Still the cost factor or putting a giant solar power system in orbit
even with cheap access to space is likely to be far more than the cost
of an earth based system for the same amount of solar power produced.

No, that's not a law of nature. Earth-based systems *with storage* are
not at all cheap.

Besides as an amateur astronomer, the thought of a swarm of bright
giant satellites orbiting the Earth is dismaying. Getting hard enough to
see stuff in the sky already.

Powersats wouldn't be particularly reflective -- their job is to absorb
sunlight, after all! -- but yes, this is a real issue, given how big they
would be. Large-scale powersat deployment could hurt ground-based
astronomy fairly seriously.
--
No, the devil isn't in the details. | Henry Spencer
The devil is in the *assumptions*. |

Most people in the US seem to be unaware that alcohols methanol and
ethanol can be manufactured from any number of plant materials. People
have their brains stuck in petroleum mode. Petroleum is very valuable
for many things--probably the least of which is burning it up on the
highway. True, you have to design an IC engine differently for ethanol
than straight gas. However, in Missouri--big maize corn raising state--
E85 is now selling for $1.85/gal, versus $2.50 for gasoline. And E85
vehicles can run on either...

In article ,
nmp wrote:
Liquid hydrocarbon fuels are of course excellent for vehicles. These
can be manufactured in a greenhouse-neutral way by using hydrogen from
electrolysis and carbon from atmospheric CO2.

Has this ever been done?

Hydrocarbon synthesis isn't nearly as easy as making hydrogen, but yes, it
has been done... on a laboratory scale. Converting hydrogen and CO2 to
methane and water is quite simple. Building up higher hydrocarbons -- you
want to go at least as far as propane for easy storage, and somewhere
around octane would minimize transition costs -- from methane is the
tricky part, but there are ways to do that, and in recent years some quite
promising ones have been found.
--
No, the devil isn't in the details. | Henry Spencer
The devil is in the *assumptions*. |

"Jo Schaper" wrote in message
...
Most people in the US seem to be unaware that alcohols methanol and
ethanol can be manufactured from any number of plant materials. People
have their brains stuck in petroleum mode. Petroleum is very valuable for
many things--probably the least of which is burning it up on the highway.
True, you have to design an IC engine differently for ethanol than
straight gas. However, in Missouri--big maize corn raising state--
E85 is now selling for $1.85/gal, versus $2.50 for gasoline. And E85
vehicles can run on either...

How do "miles-per-gallon" compare between the two?