Bush can't pull off a manned mission to eat turkey in Baghdad, yet he thinks he can pull off a manned mission to Mars! What drives him?
Bush, the man who has driven the US into near-bankruptcy and the dollar into an international collapse, while overextending US resources to the breaking point in Iraq and Afghanistan, now wants to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on a grandiose scheme to conquer the moon and Mars. Why?
Here are eleven reasons I can think off just offhand:
1. If he can divert the public's attention into space, maybe they won't notice how badly he has f-cked everything up on Earth.
2. In his never-ending quest to be likened to a real president (he's tried parallels to everyone from Lincoln to FDR to Reagan), Bush is hoping maybe someone will imagine he is like JFK, who inspired the US to set their sights for the moon. Of course that was back when America had the money to spend on such projects. And the only similarity between Bush and JFK is that they both had ruthless fathers.
3. With US corporations losing global clients left and right here on Earth due to Bush's exploitve, offensive policies, Bush figures he should now offer his corporate friends rights to set up shop on the moon or Mars - no pesky other nations to have to accommodate by behaving with integrity. Part of the plan, according to numerous reports from would-be "space speculators" is to conduct mining operations and set up garish tourist stations. What would be next? Gigantic neon signs across the face of the full moon that spell out DRINK COKE or VIAGRA?
4. He thinks all those out-of-work technical folks will get all excited, imagining that they will now have insured work for the next decades. Sorry, techies, but most of the hardware and software for any space missions will likely be manufactured in India or southeast Asia because NASA will, within the next year or so, be privatized. Do you really think these corporations will pay you $80,000 a year when they can get four Indian PhDs for the same price?
5. The intelligence/creativity level of the remaining Bush PR team (those dumb and self-disrespecting enough to stay on) is at an all-time low. "Bush Goes to Mars" is the best scheme they could come up with, having burnt themselves out with the "Turkey in Baghdad" bit.
6. Billy Graham and Pat Robertson found something in Revelation they think is a prophesy that Armageddon will actually take place on Mars, not in Iraq, as earlier believed.
7. Orrin Hatch confided to Bush that he believes God lives on Mars, not Kolob (the "cosmic planet" of Mormon scripture).
8. Unable to set up concentration camps for liberals and/or non-white, non-Protestant people here on Earth without pissing too many people off, Bush hopes to ship all his enemies to Camp Luna.
9. Bush found that bankrupting the American government was harder than he thought it would be and figured financing a mission to Mars would do the trick.
10. Bush knows he won't be reelected and is desperately trawling for some accomplishment that will be so dazzling that future generations will not remember him just as "That evil bastard."
11. Dick Cheney had a vision that there was oil on the moon.
As for the rest of us, I bet there's just one good reason we can all think of for getting a manned spacecraft to Mars, preferrably one-way:
Send Bush.
Bush Sets Sights for Mars, Moon
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/01/09/missions_to_mars_moon_u
Here are eleven reasons I can think off just offhand:
1. If he can divert the public's attention into space, maybe they won't notice how badly he has f-cked everything up on Earth.
2. In his never-ending quest to be likened to a real president (he's tried parallels to everyone from Lincoln to FDR to Reagan), Bush is hoping maybe someone will imagine he is like JFK, who inspired the US to set their sights for the moon. Of course that was back when America had the money to spend on such projects. And the only similarity between Bush and JFK is that they both had ruthless fathers.
3. With US corporations losing global clients left and right here on Earth due to Bush's exploitve, offensive policies, Bush figures he should now offer his corporate friends rights to set up shop on the moon or Mars - no pesky other nations to have to accommodate by behaving with integrity. Part of the plan, according to numerous reports from would-be "space speculators" is to conduct mining operations and set up garish tourist stations. What would be next? Gigantic neon signs across the face of the full moon that spell out DRINK COKE or VIAGRA?
4. He thinks all those out-of-work technical folks will get all excited, imagining that they will now have insured work for the next decades. Sorry, techies, but most of the hardware and software for any space missions will likely be manufactured in India or southeast Asia because NASA will, within the next year or so, be privatized. Do you really think these corporations will pay you $80,000 a year when they can get four Indian PhDs for the same price?
5. The intelligence/creativity level of the remaining Bush PR team (those dumb and self-disrespecting enough to stay on) is at an all-time low. "Bush Goes to Mars" is the best scheme they could come up with, having burnt themselves out with the "Turkey in Baghdad" bit.
6. Billy Graham and Pat Robertson found something in Revelation they think is a prophesy that Armageddon will actually take place on Mars, not in Iraq, as earlier believed.
7. Orrin Hatch confided to Bush that he believes God lives on Mars, not Kolob (the "cosmic planet" of Mormon scripture).
8. Unable to set up concentration camps for liberals and/or non-white, non-Protestant people here on Earth without pissing too many people off, Bush hopes to ship all his enemies to Camp Luna.
9. Bush found that bankrupting the American government was harder than he thought it would be and figured financing a mission to Mars would do the trick.
10. Bush knows he won't be reelected and is desperately trawling for some accomplishment that will be so dazzling that future generations will not remember him just as "That evil bastard."
11. Dick Cheney had a vision that there was oil on the moon.
As for the rest of us, I bet there's just one good reason we can all think of for getting a manned spacecraft to Mars, preferrably one-way:
Send Bush.
Bush Sets Sights for Mars, Moon
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/01/09/missions_to_mars_moon_u
Comments
Hide the following 25 comments
Bush
09.01.2004 22:15
but if I may quote: "With his job approval rating at 63 percent and unemployment falling, President George W. Bush is in position to maintain his role in the White House for another four years"
rather knocks reasons 1,2,4,9 and 10 on the head. 3,5,6,7 and 8 are just the usual Seal polemic.
watch it, Ms Seal, the spooks are watching you!
sceptic
The Facts Destroy Your Opinion
09.01.2004 22:44
Professor Colin Pillinger
so you remember the concept of logic.
1. There is things wrong with this world, but Bush has stopped some of these bad things.
This includes ridding the world of tyrannical dictatorships that kill thousands of people.
2. America does have more than enough money to spend on space missions and if he isn't a
real US President, i don't know what is. You don't like Bush's father because he crushed
communist Russia without even going to war. (Still sour from that heh)
3. US corporations are not losing global clients left right and centre. US companies have
been nothing but strong on the stock markets at the moment. Where else are these global
Clients going to go to anyway. I'm not offended by Bush's policies and spending billions of
pounds saving a countries people from tyranny and torture does not sound exploitive to me.
As for countries acting with the integrity and not invading countries to defeat terrorists
might be because they have not had thousands of civilians killed in terror attacks.
(Remember September 11th)
4. There are no plans to privatize NASA and it is very unlikely to happen. Where would
the money come from to run NASA?
5. Bush goes to Mars might be a good PR idea but you can do something worthwile with it also
being a good PR idea. Stooping low enough to insult his PR team is not only degrading but
slanderous.
6. The book of revelation is not scientifically accurate and is not meant to be intepreted as
literal.
7. No one lives on Mars. No green men with three eyes and no klingons either.
8. Luna does not refer to Mars but the moon. No one lives their either.
9. Bush hasn't bankcrupted the American Government and econmists would not argue that this
would lead to another economic depression. The last one being the most important event of
the last century. (Yes their were two world wars, but they didn't effect everyone like the
depression)
10. Polls from neutral sources suggest Bush will get reelected.
11. I've told you before - no one has or does live on the moon. (i will not go into how oil forms)
I no who's ready to man the mission to Mars. He can pick the pieces of Beagle 2 when he gets their.
Mick
...And now for a SERIOUS response to this article
10.01.2004 00:17
1) Doofus
2) Fool
3) Right Wing Reactionary
4) Get a life
Now for a SERIOUS comment.
It fairly common knowledge that the Bush administration wanted to resurrect the so-called 'Star Wars' Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) programme that the Reagan Administration tried to set up, but, went hugely over budget with and had to abandon. There is even literature floating around to suggest that the US miltary (in all seriousness) thinks of space as the next frontier they should be looking to command and conquer.
The Phrase 'King Canute' comes to mind!
There are also plenty of raw materials to be exploited on Mars if a large scale mining operation were to be started there. And, of course, they could be as messy and unethical as they like, as Greenpeace (or anyone else) won't be getting there for quite some time to come!!
As for scientific and philosophical reasons for exploring other worlds there are plenty.
Primarily to discover life on other worlds, as it is well known that about 50,000 tonnes of cosmic dust rains down on the Earth every year, some of this containing organic material. Also, amino acid material has been discovered recently in meteorite samples.
There is water on Mars, ergo there may be life.
When we do find said life on other worlds (which we will), it will more than adequately prove that:
a) That life is commonplace and not just something exclusive to planet Earth
b) We are not the centre of said Universe/Multiverse, just one of many inhabited worlds
...which should hopefully shut up quite a few reactionary rednecks (like the one above)!
Eventually we will have to move off the Earth whether we like it or not, as the Sun is, over time getting hotter and hotter (as it exhausts it's nuclear fuel), so, we'll have to find another planet to live on before all the water on the Earth is boiled away by this process.
Hopefully, of course, by then we might have had a global revolution and deposed all these morons who we laughingly call 'leaders' that are currently making such a mess of this lovely planet we all share.
Also, hopefully by this time we may have come to realise that Capitalism sucks us all dry and we should all be looking at living in more sustainable, holistic ways, otherwise all we'll be doing is transferring our mess from one planet to another!!
A. Martian
STAR WARS
10.01.2004 10:36
more stuff from the captain wardrobe newsblog
Moonbase or Deathstar?
the real STAR WARS PROJECT?
"That's no moon...that's a SPACE STATION!"
-obi wan kenobi
"National Aeronautics and Space Administration sources said the plan could call for resuming manned lunar missions by around 2015 and to use the Moon as a springboard for putting people on Mars or even beyond at a later date. "
Bush Could Announce New Manned Space Missions To Moon And Mars [Space daily]
Sources stressed that under the new space plan NASA would have to abandon its current approach of maintaining separate programs for manned and unmanned missions. Both efforts would have to be combined, using the advantages and best features of each to explore the moon, Mars, and other parts of the solar system, which is the goal at the heart of the new Bush space doctrine.
UPI Exclusive: Space plan to push robots
AIR FORCE SPACE COMMAND factsheet
History [Global security]
"We need to learn how to better protect our space assets. In this way will we be better able to develop our future plans." Wargames: Air Force Space Command's Battle Plans [space.com]
"Planners should consider integrating future development capabilities, such as the capability to deliver attacks from space, into the campaign plan when determining how best to strike adversary Centers of Gravity (COG). Space force application systems would have the advantages of rapid global access and the ability to effectively bypass adversary defenses..." Air Force Space Command: "Strategic Master Plan FY04 and Beyond" [memory hole]
Air Force Space Command Doctrine [Federation of American Scientists]
NASA has and always will be, a smokescreen for the militarization of SPACE
What better place to dictate full spectrum dominance than from the moon...?
I mean, who's going to attack them up there?
LUKE SKYWALKER, where are you!!!
peace
captain wardrobe
Captain Wardrobe
e-mail:
http://www.wardrobe.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/important.html
Don't threaten Cheryl
10.01.2004 10:43
lay off the threats and insinuation,
sceptic...
Cheryls a great writer in my opinion...
in yours: she's a threat?
cw
Captain Wardrobe
Hey, Captain Wardrobe
10.01.2004 13:39
I'm sure she's big enough to look after herself.
Lovely article totally at variance with the facts. But, hey, what are facts? Once she's switched autorave on, the facts fly out of the window.
"NASA has and always will be, a smokescreen for the militarization of SPACE"
Pity the facts don't bear you out on this one either. Gine us just one timy example?
sceptic
evidence
10.01.2004 14:06
NASA- the culmination of a programme that was started way back in 1946 [ CIA ]
and continued with the development of the U2 spyplane, sattelite intelligence and
continued with primo nutso Ronald Reagen and his 'Star wars' programme...
This has been happening for years. The history of space shuttle development shows that NASA's designs for the payload size within the cargo bay were compromised, because
the Defense dept. needed to get military equipment into orbit quickly during the 80's.
now...twenty years on, it seems that the US defense dept.
is readying itself for the final push towards FULL SPECTRUM DOMINANCE.
"Before the Allied capture of the V-2 rocket complex, von Braun engineered the surrender of 500 of his top rocket scientists, along with plans and test vehicles, to the Americans. For fifteen years after World War II, von Braun would work with the United States army in the development of ballistic missiles."
Wernher von Braun (1912-1977)
--------------------------------------
"In 1973, the Office of Special Projects, established in 1965 to manage CIA satellite reconnaissance operations became the Office of Development and Engineering (OD&E), with a mission that extended beyond satellite development. In 1987, Deputy Director for Science and Technology Evan Hineman established a new Special Projects Staff, which soon became a new Office for Special Projects. This version of the office was concerned not with satellites, but with emplaced sensors – sensors that could be placed in a fixed location to collect signals intelligence or measurement and signature intelligence (MASINT) about a specific target. Such sensors had been used to monitor Chinese missile tests, Soviet laser activity, military movements, and foreign nuclear programs."
Science technology and the CIA
--------------------------------------
"To ensure Congressional and Presidential support, NASA began making concessions. To ensure a steady supply of DOD (Department of Defense) payloads, NASA made several concessions to the USAF (United States Air Force). On-board air-breathing engines were sacrificed to increase the payload mass capabilities. The required cross-range capabilities with no air-breathing engines further compromised the design."
Doomed from the Beginning- The Solid Rocket Boosters for the Space Shuttle by Kurt Hoover and Wallace T. Fowler
--------------------------------------
Just as the advent of airpower greatly enhanced military operations of the time, space forces, likewise, greatly enhance modern military operations across the spectrum of conflict.
Air Force doctrine views air, space, and information as key ingredients for dominating the battlespace and ensuring superiority.
Effective use of space-based resources provides a continual and global presence over key areas of the world … satellites permanently "forward deployed" add another dimension to the capability of our force's ability to quickly position themselves for employment.
Military forces have always viewed the "high ground" position as one of dominance and warfare advantage. With rare exception, whoever owned the high ground owned the fight.
This capability (Space) is the ultimate high ground of US military operations. Today, control of this high ground means superiority in information and significant force enhancement. Tomorrow, ownership may mean instant engagement anywhere in the world.
Planners should consider integrating future development capabilities, such as the capability to deliver attacks from space, into the campaign plan when determining how best to strike adversary Centers of Gravity (COG). Space force application Systems would have the advantages of rapid global access and the ability to effectively bypass adversary defenses."
page 28
"No matter how it is structured, the end result is a fiscally reasonable and technologically achievable plan--one that produces a fully integrated Air and Space Force that is persuasive in peace, decisive in war and pre-eminent in any form of conflict."
Air force space-command-plan-fy2004
--------------------------------------
"Space itself will become a theater of war, as nations gain access to space capabilities and come to rely on them; further, the distinction between military and commercial space Systems combatants and noncombatants will become blurred."
'Rebuilding Americas Defences' - The Project for the New American Century (2000) FULL VERSION
there you go mr bully boy
I know Cheryl can give as good as she gets
but with the SS[that's you sceptic ...or is it septic!!!] you have to gather together in groups
and fight them to the death...
cw
cw
sadly
10.01.2004 14:18
Bringing in von Braun is also a red herring. He started by designing military missiles. Later, he went on to NASA. But saying that means NASA is a military organisation is rather like saying a Boeing 747 jumbo jet is a military weapon because the jet engines were developed in wartime.
Reconnaisance satellites have been a prime military tool since around 1960. But space has very little else to offer from the military point of view despite the occasional wishful thinking from the Pentagon. They wanted a military space station in the 1960s called Dynasoar. McNamara cancelled it as being ineffective.
The closest that NASA and the DoD came was during the genesis of the Shuttle. NASA said that to be truly effective, it should replace all other launch vehicles. The DoD wnr along with this until the Challenger disaster in 1987, when it suddenly found it couldn't launch satellites for 18 months. It pulled out of the Shuttle program and went back to expendable launchers. It hasn't touched the Shuttle since.
Moon bases? A complete waste of time and monmey militarily. It takes three days to get from earth to Moon.
"OK, guys, lets take out Moscow/Riyadh ... [fill in city of your choice]."
"Yes, general. Well, it's Saturday now. The missile should be there sometime on Tuesday."
"Hell, that'll scare them."
sceptic
missiles?
10.01.2004 16:23
but then you let yourself down by
asserting that they would use using missiles...
lasers have been developed...
travel at high speed...
all i was trying to do was give some background to the US
rush in the space race in general...
I suppose you reason that the National security archive is wrong ...
do you?
No comment on the PNAC quote?
they only dictate foreign policty right now...
Perle, Wolfovitz, John Bolton et al
and AIR FORCE space command quotes
you say USAF
the quotes are there...they have plans to hijack NASA
the columbia disaster was step 1...
Nasa will be no more and a new space military force made from the ashes of the USAF is planned for around 2015...
Alan Dulles -[cia director major player in starting up NASA, manhattem project-the a bomb], daddy Bushes mentor
was once a lawyer don't you know...he covered up NAZI deals
with grandaddy Prescott Bushes gang...
as any fool know NAZI's are capable of incredibly evil things...
why would this notion be beyond them? and you...
why do you think Beagle is gone?
why haven't the Americans offered to look with there technology?
pool resources?
cw
Captain Wardrobe
oh yeah, another thing
10.01.2004 16:30
"But saying that means NASA is a military organisation is rather like saying a Boeing 747 jumbo jet is a military weapon because the jet engines were developed in wartime. "
actually sceptic I am saying that NASA is undergoing a process of militerization...
as is the American school system which bribes kid into the reservists
with promises of tuition fees...and the riot police in MIAMI a feww months ago...
they sure looked militaristic to me...
...this is a global corporate military takeover...
that we are obseving right now...
it's just fine if you don't agree... just my opinion...cw
Captain Wardrobe
sigh
10.01.2004 18:10
Lasers? You've been watching too much James Bond. Now, direct sunlight approximates to a kilowatt per square metre. To do any damage at all, you are going to need laser powers in the order of many megawatts per square metre. Such lasers do not exist [now these are called LAWS of PHYSICS], the power sources for them do not exist. And what would be the point? To burn a city a square metre at a time? Not much of a threat. Particularly when you have nuclear submarines already in the oceans.
Dulles set up neither the Manhattan Project nor NASA. Read some history.
Right. Yeah. It was the CIA that nobbled Beagle II. Please pass that one on to Professor Pillinger.
And Columbia too? My word,their arm is long.
Riot police in Miami? A sure and certain sign that NASA is going to be militarised.
sceptic
make a comment on the quotes i've given...
10.01.2004 18:53
i'm f**king MAD!!!
Dulles and people like him [Jesse Helms is another]
were instigators of strange goings on within American
science policy...Human Radiation experiments being just one...
what do you think of the quotes sceptic?
blueprint for world domination?
as for power source?
It doesn't really matter if something is REALLY possible yet
IT CAN STILL BE THE BIG STICK...
WEILDED BY EXPERTS IN STATECRAFT
what is going to power project TESLA?
The linear collider/accelerator and X-ray laser installation...
total length 33 km
two linear accelerators with 15 km each
accelerator tunnel with approx. 5 m diameter
collision energy of 500 Giga Electron Volt
X-ray wavelength of 5 to 0.05 nanometer
superconducting accelerating structures
approx. 20 000 accelerating structures
operating temperature of 2 K, i.e. -271 deg Celsius
studies at the TESLA Test Facility -1999 / 2000
demonstration of the new SASE FEL principle -1999 / 2000
complete project proposal, approval -2001
project ready for final decision -2001 / 2002
estimated construction time -6 to 8 years
seeing as i'm such a dufus, sceptic,
why don't you check out the tesla site and tell me what it is...
exactly... cw
Captain Wardrobe
aha
10.01.2004 19:55
Not much mention of science policy there, though. Pity about that.
What is that site? It's a linear accelerator. Big question is - can you tell me what a linear accelerator is?
Actually, to put you out of yr misery, it collides particles. 500GeV. Sounds impressive, doesn't it? Actually 500GeV is an energy of 8 x 10^-8J, or less than one millionth of a joule. Approximately one million joules are needed to boil a pint of water. 500GeV is a massive amount of energy for a subatomic particle, but if one hit you, you wouldn't even notice.
Trouble, particle weapons don't work. If you read more carefully, you'll find that the 33km of tunnel need to be in an intensely high vacuum. Why? Because the range of such particles in air is about a few centimetres. Why? Because they collide with air molecules, whose mean free path is of the order of a millionth of a metre or so.
I think it would consume an amount of power equivalent to a small city. Snag is, 99.99% of that will be wasted, as it will be used to provide current to 33km of electromagnets.
Blueprint for world domination. Yeah. Trouble is, trying to make it work.
sceptic
the universe and everything
11.01.2004 09:00
"For the 3877 million Euro project (or around 7600 million German marks) spread over a time period of ten years, under the overall leadership of Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron (DESY) in Hamburg, a 33 kilometre long tunnel has to be built between 10 and 30 meters below ground, following the curvature of the earth. Forty - one scientific institutes from nine countries have already been involved in the research and development work on the TESLA linear accelerator. When the highly accelerated electrons and positrons collide head-on, they form a "ball of fire" of extremely highly concentrated pure energy. This simulates the concentration of energy during the first trillionth of a second after the beginning of the universe. As happened in the big bang, new elementary particles emerge from this energy. The physicists can thus simulate the beginnings of the cosmos and carry out experiments to examine all of this in great detail."
Now, why would anyone want to harness pure energy?
other experiments i'm inteseted in...
HAARP
"In the field of geophysics, the use of high power transmitters, such as the one located at the HAARP facility, to study the upper atmosphere is called "active ionospheric research." The HAARP facility will be used to introduce a small, known amount of energy into a specific ionospheric layer for the purpose of studying the complex physical processes that occur in these naturally occurring plasma regions that are created each day by the sun. The effects of this added energy are limited to a small region directly over the HAARP observatory ranging in size from 9 km in radius to as much as 40 km in radius. "
Question
Why re-create the effects of sunspots on our atmosphere?
when the sun is doing it constantly...
How can their transmissions/readings, compete/differentiate with the suns mighty power?
Shouldn't science be more involved with the receiving of data?...not the out of laboratory transmitting of energy?
Or is it the case that Planet earth, and ALL the life on it, are just one big laboratory experiment to these LUNATICS?
I admit i am a bit new to the science but the philosophy
of it interests me...
(some background on the HAARP project)
[globalpolicy.org]
news story:
Agitated sunspots cause trouble - shanghai star
"The U.S. plans to carry out large-scale scientific experiments, under the HAARP program, and not controlled by the global community, will create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines and have a negative impact on the mental health of people populating entire regions, the deputies said. "
[federation of American Scientists]
HAARP - an ionosphere weapon invented by Eastlund Scientific Enterprises Corporations.
[
Arco [OIL] was then 'assigned the patent '
[
which was then bought by Advanced Power Technology,
[
which became a subsidory of BAE systems
[
as part of it's 'INFORMATION AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE GROUP'
[
yours in peace and thanks for the knowledge sceptic
cw
Captain Wardrobe
In light of the above comments...
11.01.2004 15:18
What a bunch of losers these military and (so-called) government really are!
I'm sure that the rest of the universe would not miss ANY of them if they were deposed.
A. Martian
solar flare
11.01.2004 18:58
scientist create solar flare in lab...
so what is Haarp really for?!!!
and sceptic , lasers are not just james bond
just not quite the weapon we thought they might be...
and this might answer the power source problem as well...
Super laser advances fusion research
Fusion power 'within reach'
this is the pure energy they want to harness...
maybe not!!!
they could try to utilize a Haarp antennea array on the moon
controlling the ionosphere from the outside in, as it were...
who knows?
cw
Captain Wardrobe
indeed
11.01.2004 19:09
But not a lot of relevance to Moon bases or trips to Mars.
the point of recreating the effects of sunspots is that althouigh they do have a considerable effect on the Earth's atmosphere, we can't do any controlled experiments because we can't switch the sun on or off. HAARP gives an opportunity to study these effects in a controlled and small scale manner. "When the HAARP HF transmitter is shut down at the end of an experiment, any ionospheric effects rapidly dissipate, becoming imperceptible over time frames ranging from fractions of a second to minutes." from one of your sources.
The FAS link actually is a report from the Russian parliament, which is not exactly a technical analysis.
The BushBlade: "Accelerated ozone loss and polar ice-cap melting, or Earth flying into the sun are foreseen if Bernard Eastlund's invention, he says is perfect for Alaska, is tested, said physicists." The Earth flying into the sun? Too many Hollywood movies.
But again, very little relevance to the Moon or Mars.
sceptic
what of chaos theory?
11.01.2004 22:07
or should that be D.O.E!!!
but
why can't they just observe what the sun is doing?
why isn't that good enough...
to replicate the suns effects on the ionosphere
just doesn't make sense...
controlled experiments on atmosphere...
it's our atmosphere!!!
What right do they have and how does anyone know that they aren't fluttering
a butterflies wings causing untold damage...? re:chaos theory...
I understand a little more now...and I guess
smashing together particles
to find the meaning of life is OK...
I don't think it's a bomb!!!
or a missile base...!
they are doing these experiments all over the world
(Argonne Institute-US)
I just think it's a little odd that these projects
cost zillions and know one knows about them...
what of the BAE newsletter
claiming the ownership of the patent for HAARP
facility as part of its weapons division?
i'm a sceptic too ,it seems
cw
Captain Wardrobe
and another thing
11.01.2004 22:15
my brain has gone sceptic, ifear...
i just wanted to add that i agree with launching
space missions from the moon...
seems the logical thing to do ...
fly the means to build a shhip up to the moon base
and set off to mars from there...
this has to involve all nations
and after we pretty much
ensure those here on this rock...
and the rock itself have a future...
a space program is not my problem...
my problem is, that when the Americans
say they are going to do this, it invariably means
something else is also on the cards...something NASTY...
cw
Captain Wardrobe
kill kontrol
12.01.2004 00:44
Captain Wardrobe
thank you Captain Wardrobe
12.01.2004 10:58
1. If he can divert the public's attention into space, maybe they won't notice how badly he has f-cked everything up on Earth.
2. In his never-ending quest to be likened to a real president (he's tried parallels to everyone from Lincoln to FDR to Reagan), Bush is hoping maybe someone will imagine he is like JFK, who inspired the US to set their sights for the moon. Of course that was back when America had the money to spend on such projects. And the only similarity between Bush and JFK is that they both had ruthless fathers.
Characteristics of the content self-evident. No additional information is required to recognize the characteristics of this type of propaganda. "Name calling" and the use of slogans are techniques of this nature.
And
Assertion. Assertions are positive statements presented as fact. They imply that what is stated is self-evident and needs no further proof. Assertions may or may not be true.
3. With US corporations losing global clients left and right here on Earth due to Bush's exploitve, offensive policies, Bush figures he should now offer his corporate friends rights to set up shop on the moon or Mars - no pesky other nations to have to accommodate by behaving with integrity. Part of the plan, according to numerous reports from would-be "space speculators" is to conduct mining operations and set up garish tourist stations. What would be next? Gigantic neon signs across the face of the full moon that spell out DRINK COKE or VIAGRA?
4. He thinks all those out-of-work technical folks will get all excited, imagining that they will now have insured work for the next decades. Sorry, techies, but most of the hardware and software for any space missions will likely be manufactured in India or southeast Asia because NASA will, within the next year or so, be privatized. Do you really think these corporations will pay you $80,000 a year when they can get four Indian PhDs for the same price?
Plain Folks or Common Man: The "plain folks" or "common man" approach attempts to convince the audience that the propagandist's positions reflect the common sense of the people. It is designed to win the confidence of the audience by communicating in the common manner and style of the audience. Propagandists use ordinary language and mannerisms (and clothes in face-to-face and audiovisual communications) in attempting to identify their point of view with that of the average person. With the plain folks device, the propagandist can win the confidence of persons who resent or distrust foreign sounding, intellectual speech, words, or mannerisms.
5. The intelligence/creativity level of the remaining Bush PR team (those dumb and self-disrespecting enough to stay on) is at an all-time low. "Bush Goes to Mars" is the best scheme they could come up with, having burnt themselves out with the "Turkey in Baghdad" bit.
6. Billy Graham and Pat Robertson found something in Revelation they think is a prophesy that Armageddon will actually take place on Mars, not in Iraq, as earlier believed.
7. Orrin Hatch confided to Bush that he believes God lives on Mars, not Kolob (the "cosmic planet" of Mormon scripture).
11. Dick Cheney had a vision that there was oil on the moon.
Obtain Disapproval. This technique is used to get the audience to disapprove an action or idea by suggesting the idea is popular with groups hated, feared, or held in contempt by the target audience. Thus, if a group which supports a policy is led to believe that undesirable, subversive, or contemptible people also support it, the members of the group might decide to change their position.
Name Calling or Substitutions of Names or Moral Labels. This technique attempts to arouse prejudices in an audience by labeling the object of the propaganda campaign as something the target audience fears, hates, loathes, or finds undesirable.
Guilt by association. Your acquaintances are bad so you must be also.
8. Unable to set up concentration camps for liberals and/or non-white, non-Protestant people here on Earth without pissing too many people off, Bush hopes to ship all his enemies to Camp Luna.
9. Bush found that bankrupting the American government was harder than he thought it would be and figured financing a mission to Mars would do the trick.
Assertion. Assertions are positive statements presented as fact. They imply that what is stated is self-evident and needs no further proof. Assertions may or may not be true.
Simplification. Favorable generalities are used to provide simple answers to complex social, political, economic, or military problems.
The article in general:
Insinuation. Insinuation is used to create or stir up the suspicions of the target audience against ideas, groups, or individuals in order to divide an enemy. The propagandist hints, suggests, and implies, allowing the audience to draw its own conclusions.
And
Simplification. This is a technique in which the many facts of a situation are reduced so the right or wrong, good or evil, of an act or decision is obvious to all. This technique (simplification) provides simple solutions for complex problems. By suggesting apparently simple solutions for complex problems, this technique offers simplified interpretations of events, ideas, concepts, or personalities. Statements are positive and firm; qualifying words are never used.
I think that sums up Ms Seal's article quite nicely.
sceptic
it's war
12.01.2004 11:41
and your reply to Cheryl
threatening her?
pure psyops sceptic
you don't want to admit your in the game
but you are obviously on the defensive
(another trick!!!)
that's the situation we are in mr spook...sceptic tank yank boy
world war III was the post war wearing down the masses
the
instigation of the addiction to 'lifestyle'...
cosmetic assertions of freedom...used to justify
the dehumanization of the un-privelidged...
world war IV is the war of information...
this is happening right now...because
the internet is no doubt
the biggest public forum ever invented...
it's a middle class plaything...
and that is what makes it so dangerous
to the powers that be...
the middle class are now the
major voters within society...
they must be contained...apparently by planting
false information and using propaganda techniques...
it's nothing new:
so...it's war...
use your head...
look busy
cw
Captain Wardrobe
only one snag to all this
12.01.2004 13:36
sceptic
see it's psyops...
12.01.2004 14:55
as was the jesse helms mistake!!!
it is of course Richard Helms
the head of CIA
during period of MK ULTRA
/radiation experiments
who junked all the evidence...
thanks for an interesting debate, anyway
sceptic
end....?
Captain Wardrobe
a late addition
11.01.2006 01:25
Dr. David R. Criswell
Institute for Space Systems Operations, University of Houston
Houston, TX U.S.A.
1. Introduction
Approximately6 kWt/person or, eventually, 2 kWe/person can enable energy prosperity. Note that "t" refers to thermal energy and "e" to electric energy. For a population of 10 billion people, anticipated by 2050, this implies 60,000 GWt or 20,000 GWe. For purposes of discussion, assume that power usage continues to be high to 2070. From 2000 to 2070 the world would consume approximately 3,000,000 GWt-Y or 1,000,000 GWe-Y of energy [1, 2, 3, 4]. It is highly unlikely that conventional fossil, nuclear, and terrestrial renewable power systems can provide the power needed by 2050 and the total energy consumed by 2070. They are restricted by limited supplies of fuels, pollution and wastes, irregular supplies of renewable energy, costs of creating and operating the global systems, and other factors.
It is technically and economically feasible to provide at least 100,000 GWe of solar electric energy from facilities on the Moon. The Lunar Solar Power (LSP) System can supply to Earth power that is independent of the biosphere and does not introduce CO2, ash, or other material wastes into the biosphere. Inexhaustible new net electrical energy provided by the LSP System enables the creation of new net material wealth on Earth that is decoupled from the biosphere. Given adequate clean electric power, humanity's material needs can be acquired from common resources and recycled without the use of depletable fuels [4, 5]. LSP power increases the ability of tomorrow's generations to meet tomorrow's needs, and enables humanity to move beyond simply attempting to sustain itself within the biosphere to nurturing the biosphere.
Fig. 1 illustrates the essential features of the LSP System: Sun, Moon, microwave power beam from a power base on the Moon, and a microwave receiver or rectenna on Earth. The LSP System uses bases on opposing limbs of the Moon. Each base transmits multiple microwave power beams directly to Earth rectennas when the rectennas can view the Moon. Each base is augmented by fields of photoconverters just across the limb of the Moon. Thus, one of the two bases in the pair can beam power toward Earth over the entire. cycle of the lunar day and night. This version of LSP supplies extra energy to a rectenna on Earth while the rectenna can view the Moon. The extra energy is stored and then released when the Moon is not in view.
The LSP System is an unconventional approach to supplying commercial power to Earth. However, the key operational technologies of the LSP have been demonstrated at a high technology readiness level (TRL = 7). TRL = 7 denotes technology demonstrated at an appropriate scale in the appropriate environment [6].
Power beams are considered esoteric and a technology of the distant future. However, Earth-to-Moon power beams of near-commercial intensity are an operational reality. Fig. 2 is picture of the South Pole of the Moon that was taken by the Arecibo radar in Puerto Rico. The Arecibo beam passes through the ionosphere with an intensity the order of 20 - 25 W/m2. The LSP System is designed to provide power beams at Earth with intensities of less than 20% of noon-time sunlight (= 230 W/m2). Lower intensity beams are economically reasonable. The intensity of microwaves scattered from the beam will be orders of magnitude less than allowed for continuous exposure of the general population.
Load-following electrical power, without expensive storage, is highly desirable. Earth orbiting satellites can redirect beams to rectennas that cannot view the Moon and thus enable load-following power to rectennas located anywhere on Earth. Rectennas on Earth and the lunar transmitters can be sized to permit the use of Earth orbiting redirectors that are 200 m to 1,000 m in diameter. Redirected satellites can be reflectors or retransmitters. The technology is much more mature than realized by the technical community at large.
Fig. 3 is an artist's concept of the new Trumpet satellite that employs a 100 m diameter reflector antenna. Trumpet is now in geosynchronous orbit. It is operated by the U.S. National Reconnaissance Office [7]. This reflector, only a few tons in mass, has a diameter within a factor of 1 to 3 of that necessary to redirect a power beam to a 1 km diameter or larger rectenna on Earth. Trumpet is reportedly similar in design to antennas planned for the Hughes commercial HS 601 AMPT satellites. Power beams and redirector satellites can minimize the need for long-distance power transmission lines and their associated systems.
Alternatively, a power beam from the Moon can be received by a receiver satellite. The relay satellite then retransmits new beams to several rectennas on Earth. The transmission of beams, with commercial level intensity in low Earth orbit, has been demonstrated by unmanned and manned spacecraft. Fig. 4 illustrates the NASA Shuttle with a phased array making a synthetic aperture radar picture of the Earth. Near the Shuttle the beam has an intensity the order of 150 W/m2. This is well within the range for commercial transmission of power [6, 8].
Approximately once a year the Earth will eclipse all the lunar power bases for up to 3 hours. This predictable outage can be accommodated by power storage of defined capacity or reserve generators on Earth. Alternatively, a fleet of solar mirrors in orbit about the Moon can reflect solar power to selected bases during eclipses and during sunrise and sunset. These solar reflectors, actually types of solar sails, will be less expensive to build and operate than the high precision reflectors such as in Fig. 3 [6, 7].
2. LSP demonstration base
The lunar portion of an LSP System prototype Power Base is depicted in Fig. 5. A Power Base is a fully segmented, multi-beam, phased array radar powered by solar energy. This Power Base consists of tens to hundreds of thousands of independent power plots such as depicted in the middle to lower right portion of Fig. 5. Each power plot emits multiple sub-beams. Sets of correlated sub-beams from all the plots are phased electronically to produce one power beam. A given base can project tens to hundreds of independent power beams.
A power plot consists of four elements. There are arrays of solar converters, shown here as north-south aligned rows of photovoltaics. Solar electric power is collected by a buried network of wires and delivered to the microwave transmitters. Power plots can utilize many different types of solar converters and many different types of electric-to-microwave converters. In this example the microwave transmitters are buried under the mound of lunar soil at the Earthward end of the power plot. Each transmitter illuminates the microwave reflector located at the anti-Earthward end of its power plot. The reflectors overlap, when viewed from Earth, to form a filled lens that can direct very narrow and well defined power beams toward Earth. The Earth is fixed in the sky above the Power Base.
To achieve low unit cost of energy, the lunar portions of the LSP System are made primarily of lunar-derived components [2, 3, 9]. Factories, fixed and mobile, are transported from the Earth to the Moon. High output greatly reduces the impact of high transportation costs from the Earth to the Moon. On the Moon the factories produce 100s to 1,000s of times their own mass in LSP components. Construction and operation of the rectennas on Earth constitute greater than 90% of the engineering costs. Upfront costs can be reduced by using lunar materials to make significant fractions of the machines of production and support facilities. Most aspects of manufacturing and operations on the Moon can be controlled by personnel in virtual work places on Earth [9, 10].
An LSP demonstration Power Base, scaled to deliver the order of 10 to 100 GWe, can cost as little as 20 billion dollars over 10 years [2, 9, 11]. This assumes the establishment of a permanent base on the Moon, by one or more national governments, that is devoted to the industrial utilization of lunar resources for manufacturing and logistics. Such a base is the next logical step for the world space programs after completion of the International Space Station.
LSP is practical with 1980s technology and a low overall efficiency of conversion of sunlight to Earth power of ~0.15%. Higher system efficiencies, = 35%, are possible by 2020, and greater production efficiencies sharply reduce the scale of production processes and up-front costs. An LSP System with 35% overall efficiency will occupy only 0.15% of the lunar surface and supply 20,000 GWe to Earth.
There are no "magic" resources or technologies in Fig. 1 or Fig. 5. Any handful of lunar dust and rocks contains at least 20% silicon, 40% oxygen, and 10% metals (iron, aluminum, etc.). Lunar dust can be used directly as thermal, electrical, and radiation shields, converted into glass, fiberglass, and ceramics, and processed chemically into its elements. Solar cells, electric wiring, some micro-circuitry components, and the reflector screens can be made out of lunar materials. Soil handling and glass production are the primary industrial operations. Selected microcircuitry can be supplied from Earth.
Unlike Earth, the Moon is the ideal environment for large-area solar converters. The solar flux to the lunar surface is predicable and dependable. There is no air or water to degrade large-area thin film devices. The Moon is extremely quiet mechanically. It is devoid of weather, significant seismic activity, and biological processes that degrade terrestrial equipment. Solar collectors can be made that are unaffected by decades of exposure to solar cosmic rays and the solar wind. Sensitive circuitry and wiring can be buried under a few- to tens- of centimeters of lunar soil and completely protected against solar radiation, temperature extremes, and micrometeorites.
The United States has sponsored over 500 million dollars of research on the lunar samples and geophysical data since the first lunar landing in 1969. This knowledge is more than adequate to begin designing and demonstrating on Earth the key lunar components and production processes. Lunar exploration is continuing. The DoD Clementine probe and the new NASA Lunar Prospector (
3. Rectennas and energy delivery on Earth
The Power Bases direct microwave power beams to rectennas on Earth as shown in Fig. 1. The intensity of each beam can be controlled to provide load following power. The beams pass through clouds, rain, and dust. There is no need for long-distance power transmission lines or indeterminately large systems to store power.
Power beams are assumed to have an intensity of about 20% that of sunlight just above the rectenna (~ 230 W/m2). A few hundred meters from the edge of the rectenna the intensity will be 1% or less of the central intensity. Farther from the rectenna the stray power of a 20,000 GWe system will drop in intensity to that of the light from a full moon. LSP can be competitive with the conventional systems even if the beam is operated at intensities below those allowed for continuous exposure of the general population (10 W/m2 at 1.5 GHz to 100 W/m2 at 15 GHz). The energy received by the rectenna can be fully offset by reflecting back to space, from the area of the rectenna or elsewhere, an equal amount of low-quality solar energy. LSP energy can be environmentally neutral.
Rectennas are the major cost element of the LSP System. Rectennas will occupy as little as 5% of the land-area per unit of received energy as now devoted to the production and distribution of electricity. A rectenna can begin outputting commercial power after it reaches 0.5 km in diameter. Additional construction is paid for out of current revenue. A rectenna of one-square-kilometer area with an average output of 180 MWe produces every year the electric energy equivalent to burning 3.3 million barrels of oil or 650,000 tons of coal in a fossil-fueled electric plant.
Rectennas can be placed virtually anywhere on Earth. It is reasonable to situate them over open land that is not used. It also appears reasonable to place them over agricultural land and industrially zoned property and facilities. They would provide additional revenue the order of 4 $/m2 -Y for power sold at 0.03 $/kWe-h. Rectennas can be placed in countries or regions that do not have indigenous energy resources. Rectennas enable non-polluting solar electric power to efficiently support recycling, use of common mineral resources, and petrochemical processing of hydrocarbons into more valuable process chemicals and products. Rectennas provide both developed and developing countries equal access to electric power for economic development and the enhancement and preservation of the local environment.
Table 1 compares estimated life-cycle costs of five power systems scaled to provide 1,000,000 GWe-Y of energy. The costs are given in trillions (1 T = 1·1012) of U.S. dollars. The estimates are based on studies of systems utilizing 1990s levels of technology [12, 13, 14]. The major cost categories are capital, labor, fuel, and waste handling and mitigation. Thirty percent of the costs of the coal and fission systems are for regional power distribution systems. The terrestrial solar photovoltaic system costs are scaled from studies of globally distributed photovoltaics linked by a global electrical transmission system. However, no power storage is included [15]. Both LSP Systems, power storage on Earth or load-following, offers enormous savings in the cost of production and distribution of electric power. The savings are the order of 1,000 trillion dollars over coal to the order of 8,000 trillion dollars for terrestrial solar photovoltaic.
Cost estimates for the LSP energy are derived from systems level analyses conducted by General Dynamics on the cost of building space solar power satellites (SSPS) from lunar materials [11, 16, 17]. For similar levels of manufacturing and operating technologies the LSP approach is approximately 50 times more cost effective than making SSPS from lunar materials or deploying SSPS from Earth. Lunar and space operations are a small fraction of the LSP System life-cycle cost. For the load-following LSP System the construction and operation of rectennas on Earth represents over 90% of the expenditures. For the LSP that uses power storage on Earth (deep pumped hydro is assumed). The terrestrial expenditures account for over 95% of total costs [18].
4. LSP System power and economic growth
The 70 year life-cycle costs of power for an energy-prosperous world are so enormous that it is difficult to understand their scale and significance. One method is to calculate the simple sum of gross world product (GWP) over that same period. Assume that GWP/person is 4,000 $/person-Y over that period. The sum is 2,400 trillion dollars. Alternatively, present economic growth of approximately 2%/Y-person sums to only 3,700 trillion dollars. Such "poor" worlds simply cannot afford to build and operate the coal, fission, and terrestrial photovoltaic systems. Approximately 10% of GWP is now expended on the production and consumption of commercial energy. This corresponds to 240 to 370 trillion dollars between 2000 and 2070. These sums are much smaller than the costs of conventional systems but larger than projected for the LSP System. A poor world must remain energy poor if it uses only conventional power systems. However, the less costly LSP System electricity can both save money and accelerate the generation of wealth.
Between 1960 and 1986, the total electric energy Ee (Y) used every year, measured in T kWe-h, was an excellent index of the annual GWP in trillions of dollars (T$e(Y)) in a given year "Y" [19, 12]. Equation 1 includes the annual increase in productivity of energy Eff(Y) of approximately 1%/Y. The cost of 1,000 TWe-Y of energy delivered between 2000 and 2070 is taken to be 200 T$.
T$e (Y) = 4.3 T$ + [1.2 T$/TkWe-h]· Ee(Y) · Eff(Y) - 200T$/(70 Y) Equation (1)
Applying Equation (1) to the production of 1,000,000 GWe-Y of energy by 2070 predicts an integral net GWP ~ 14,700 T$ by 2070 or 12,300 T$ more than the 2,400 T$ predicted for a "poor" world. Equation 1 also implies an average annual income in 2070 of 36,000 $ per person. This is approximately 10 times present per capita world income.
5. Conclusions
Enormous attention is directed to discovering and promoting "sustainable" sources of energy and seeking more efficient means of utilizing conventional commercial and renewable energy. However, there are clear limits to the conventional options. Over 4 billion of Earth's nearly 6 billion people are poor in both wealth and energy. Their existence depends primarily on new net energy taken from the biosphere. This energy is harvested as wood, grass, grain, live stock from the land, fish from the seas, and in many other direct and indirect products. The biosphere incorporates each year approximately 100,000 GWt-Y of solar energy in the form of new net plant mass (algae, trees, grass, etc.). It is estimated that humanity now directly extracts ~ 5% of that new energy and disturbs a much greater fraction of the natural cycles of power through the biosphere. People divert almost 50% of the new solar photosynthetic energy from its natural cycles through the biosphere [21. 22]. Humankind now collects and uses approximately 50% of all the rain water that falls on accessible regions of the continents. Given the continuing growth of human population, most of the fresh water used by humans will be obtained through desalination.
Human energy needs can be accommodated by approximately 6 kWt/person or in the next century by approximately 2 kWe/person [4, 23, 24, 25]. For a population of 10 billion people this corresponds to a minimum of 2,000,000 GWe-Y, or 2,000 TWe-Y, of electric energy per century. Much more energy might be desirable.
It is widely recognized that the lack of affordable and environmentally benign commercial energy limits the wealth available to the majority of the human population [20]. However, there is almost no discussion of how to provide the enormous quantities of quality commercial energy needed for an "energy-rich" world population. The dashed curve of Fig. 6 depicts the cumulative depletion of terrestrial fossil thermal energy by a prosperous human population in tera-Watt-Y (= 1,000 GW-Y) of thermal energy. There is approximately 4,000 to 6,000 TWt-Y of economically accessible fossil fuels. Thus, the "Fossil" energy use stops changing between 2050 and 2100 when the prosperous world consumes the fossil fuels. There are other severe fundamental problems with global prosperity based on fossil fuels. For example, burning the fossil carbon will increase atmospheric CO2 by a factor of 15 or more. Economically available uranium and thorium can provide only the order of 250,000 GWt-Y of energy. The doubling rate for nuclear fuels is too long for the breeding of adequate fuels to meet the energy needs of a prosperous world by 2050 [26]. Breeder systems would provide only the order of 10,000,000 GWt-Y or 3,000,000 GWe-Y of energy before requiring the use of uranium and thorium from sea water and granite at a much higher cost of process energy.
Consideration of the LSP System is recommended by technical [27], national [28], and international panels [29, 30] and scientists active in lunar research [30, 31, 32]. An LSP System scaled to enable global energy prosperity by 2050 can, between 2050 and 2070, stop the depletion of terrestrial resources and bring net new non-polluting energy into the biosphere. Humanity can stop extracting resources from the biosphere, become independent of the biosphere for material needs, and have excess energy to nurture the biosphere. The boundaries of routine human activities will be extended beyond the Earth to the Moon and a two-planet economy will be established.
References
Criswell, D. R., "Solar-electric power via the moon," Power Technology International, pp. 24 - 26, Spring, 1997. And in press with errata, in Environmental Strategies - Asia., February, 1998.
Criswell, D. R., "Lunar-solar power system: Needs, concept, challenges, pay-offs," IEEE Potentials, pp. 4-7, April/May, 1996.
Criswell, D. R. and Waldron, R. D., "International lunar base and the lunar-based power system to supply Earth with electric power," Acta Astronautica, 29, No. 6, pp. 469-480, 1993.
Goeller, H. E. and Weinberg, A. M., "The age of substitutability," Science, 191, pp. 683-689, 1976.
Ausubel, J. H., "Can technology save the Earth?," American Scientist, 84, pp.166 - 178, 1996.
Criswell, D. R., "Lunar solar power: review of the technology readiness base of an LSP system," 47th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, IAF-96-R.2.04, Beijing, China, 11 pp., 1996.
Couvault, C., "NRO radar, sigint launches readied," Av. Week & Space Technology, pp. 22-24, 1 September, 1998. Also, "Boeing's Secret," pp. 21, 8 December, 1997.
Caro E., Personal comm. (NASA/JPL SAR Prog. Eng), 25 September, 1996.
Criswell L, D. R., "Lunar solar power: scale and cost versus technology level, boot-strapping, and cost of Earth-to-orbit transport," 46th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation., IAF-95-R.2.02, 7 pp., 1995.
Waldron, R. D. and Criswell, D. R., "Overview of Lunar Industrial Operations," proc. of the 12th Symposium on Space Nuclear Power and Propulsion: The Conference on Alternative Power from Space. AIP Conf. Proc. 324, Part Two, pp. 965-971, 1995.
Criswell, D. R., "Solar power system based on the Moon," in Solar Power Satellites, Glaser, P., Davidson F. P., and Csigi, K. (editors), Wiley, 654pp., Chapter 4.11, pp. 599 - 621, 1997.
Criswell, D. R., "Challenges of commercial space solar power," 48th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, IAA-97-R.2.04, Turin, Italy, 7pp., 1997.
Criswell, D. R. and Thompson, R. G., "Data envelopment analysis of space and terrestrial-based large scale commercial power systems for Earth: A prototype analysis of their relative economic advantages," Solar Energy, 56, No. 1, pp. 119-131, 1996.
Criswell, D. R., "Lunar-based solar power and world economic development," 48th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, IAA-97-IAA.8.1.04, Turin, Italy, 6 pp., 1997.
Klimke, M., "New concepts of terrestrial and orbital solar power plants for future European power supply," in SPS'97: Conference on Space Power Systems, Energy and Space for Mankind, 341 pp., Canadian Aeronautics and Space Inst. (Montreal) and Société des Electriciens et Electroniciens (France), pp. 67 - 72, 1997.
Criswell, D. R. and Waldron, R. D., "Results of analysis of a lunar-based power system to supply Earth with 20,000 GW of electric power," proc. SPS'91 Power from Space: 2nd Int. Symp., pp. 186-193. Also - in A Global Warming Forum: Scientific, Economic, and Legal Overview, Geyer, R. A., (editor) CRC Press, Inc., 638pp., Chapter 5, pp. 111 - 124, 1991.
Criswell, D. R. and Waldron, R. D. "Lunar system to supply electric power to Earth," proc. 25th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conf., 1, pp. 61 - 70, 1990.
Criswell D. R., "Lunar solar power system: system options, costs, and benefits to Earth," in Proc. 30th Intersoc. Energy Conversion Engineering Conf., 1, pp. 595-600, 1995.
Starr, C., "Implications of continuing electrification" in Energy: Production, Consumption, and Consequences, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 296 pp,. pp. 52-71., 1990.
World Energy Council, Energy for Tomorrow's World, St. Martin's Press, 320 pp., 1993.
Ehrlich, P. R. and Roughgarden, J., The Science of Ecology, see Table 23-1, Macmillian Pub. Co., pp. 524-525, 1987.
Rees, W. E. and Wachernagel, M., "Appropriated carrying capacity: Measuring the natural capital requirements of the human economy,". in A. M. Jansson, M. Hammer, C. Folke, and R. Costanza (eds.) Investing in natural capital: The ecological economic approach to sustainability. Island Press, Wash., DC. pp. 362-390, 1994.
Criswell, D. R., "Net Growth in the Two Planet Economy" (Invited), 45th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation: Session: A Comprehensive Rationale for Astronautics, Jerusalem, IAF-94-IAA.8.1.704, 10 pp., October, 1994.
Criswell, D. R., "Lunar Solar Power System and World Economic Development," Chapter 2.5.2 , 10 pp., of Solar Energy and Space Report, in WORLD SOLAR SUMMIT, UNESCO. Paris, 1993.
Criswell, D. R., "Commercial lunar solar power and sustainable growth of the two-planet economy" (invited, in press), Acta Forum Engelberg 1998, 13 pp. (ms), Engelberg, Switzerland, 24 - 27 March, 1998.
Rowe, W. D., "Renewable energy: target for 2050., IEEE Spectrum, pp. 58 - 63, April, 1982.
NASA, Lunar Energy Enterprise Case Study Task Force., TM-101652, 1989.
Stafford, T., America at the Threshold: Report of the Synthesis Group on America's Space Exploration Initiative. 181 pp., Wash., D.C.: GPO., 1991.
European Space Agency, Rendezvous with the new millennium: The report of ESA's Long-term Space Policy Committee, pp. 38 - 45, SP-1187 Annex, 108pp., 1995.
International Lunar Exploration Working Group Report (NASA, NASDA, ESA, and discipline participants), Un. Kyoto, Japan, 14-17 October, 1996.
Sullivan, T. A. and McKay, D. S., Using Space Resources, pp. 11 - 12, NASA Johnson Space Center, 27pp., 1991.
Spudis, P. D., The Once and Future Moon, 308pp., Smithsonian Inst. Press, 1996.
Summary
It is technically and environmentally feasible to provide commercial solar electric power to Earth from solar power facilities on the Moon. The Lunar Solar Power (LSP) System can supply electric energy to Earth at less than 0.01 $/kWe-h that is independent of the biosphere and does not introduce CO2, ash, or other material wastes into the biosphere. The LSP System uses bases on opposing limbs of the Moon as seen from Earth. Each base transmits multiple microwave power beams directly to Earth receivers called rectennas when a given rectenna can view the Moon. Also, satellites in orbit about Earth can be used to redirect beams to rectennas that cannot view the Moon and thus enable load-following power to rectennas located anywhere on Earth. The LSP System is an unconventional approach to supplying commercial power to Earth. However, the key operational technologies have been demonstrated at a high technology readiness level.
To achieve low unit cost of energy the lunar portions of the LSP System are made primarily of lunar-derived components. Factories, fixed and mobile, are transported from the Earth to the Moon. On the Moon the factories produce 100s to 1,000s of times their own mass in LSP components. Construction and operation of the power receivers on Earth constitute greater than 90% of the engineering costs. An LSP demonstration Power Base, scaled to deliver the order of 10 to 100 GWe, can cost as little as 20 billion dollars in incremental costs over 10 years when completed as part of a large permanent base on the Moon. Capacity can grow to 20,000 GWe within the 21st century and eventually to greater than 100,000 GWe.
Global energy prosperity requires commercial systems that supply at least 2 kWe/person by approximately 2050 and approximately 1,000,000 GWe-Y of energy by 2070. Conventional renewable and non-renewable systems cannot achieve these goals. An LSP System can enable global energy prosperity by 2050, stop the depletion of terrestrial resources, bring new non-polluting net energy into the biosphere, and greatly accelerate the creation of new net wealth on Earth.
cw