tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post4192921264963558508..comments2024-03-28T04:58:13.341-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Looking ahead...Signs of changeDavid Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger73125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-29356319898775322292015-09-20T01:26:30.598-07:002015-09-20T01:26:30.598-07:00Alex Tolley,
Of course VCs lost lots of money in ...Alex Tolley,<br /><br />Of course VCs lost lots of money in investments but some have made a lot of money too. It is a high-risk high-reward business. It is not something in which you would invest your grandmother’s savings. VCs when they invest look at two things, technical risk and market risk. For technical risk they need a working prototype before giving any money and then they look to see if there is a market for it or if a new market can be created. If both are good then they pour money into it. With asteroid mining I see the same process involved. Planetary Resources and others are in the stage of producing the prototype technology and hopefully finding ways to lower the cost and increasing the reliability. Notably at this stage the money comes from wealthy individuals who have a dream and not from VCs. These companies (Stratolaunch Systems, Planetary Resources, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, SpaceX, and Bigelow Aerospace) are financed by about 10 billionaires (Paul Allen, Larry Page, Eric E. Schmidt, Ram Shriram, Charles Simony, Ross Perot, Jr., Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson, Elon Musk, and Robert Bigelow). If (and it is a big if) the technology part progresses well enough then the VCs will look at the market for the product. Fortunately the market for the target metals is very robust and deep. At this point if the numbers work out you get VC investment and can be massive if the potential looks good. Sure maybe they will lose their shirts but that is just part of the game. <br /><br />I am not really worried by the legal risks. Once proven feasible there would be a huge incentive for countries to get together to lay down the ground rules. After all, mining is perhaps the most environmentally destructive industries around. <br /><br />Mining and energy companies do take big risks in deep water and arctic drilling as you pointed out but these are just extensions of their own basic businesses. They stick to doing what they know how to do and don’t go off in tangents when it comes to big investments and for reason. Big shareholders do not look favorably on that type of behavior. However they would come in later when the concept becomes reality.<br /><br />Elon Musk is looking much further than just providing a few trips a year to the International Space Station or just launching satellites. He wants to be the best and cheapest way to get into space and sees the day when space activity will explode making his company very profitable. He believes very deeply in the potential of space not only to make money but also what it would bring to the Human Race and has the guts to put down a lot of his own money to bring this about. It wouldn’t surprise me that he is also thinking of selling “rocket shovels” to miners. He looks that far ahead.<br />Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-16715791727986606082015-09-19T17:38:40.193-07:002015-09-19T17:38:40.193-07:00onward
onwardonward<br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-14233057064038915292015-09-19T16:12:39.158-07:002015-09-19T16:12:39.158-07:00Next post has gone in a different direction, so I&...<br />Next post has gone in a different direction, so I'll answer here:<br /><br />Jumper,<br /><i>"I'm curious if there has ever been study of mounting a rocket (probably solid fuel) on steep railgun, accelerating it to higher g than people can take, and adjusting final orbit or trajectory with the rocket. For cargo, obviously."</i><br /><br />Many times. Several issues come up.<br /><br />- There's a speed limit on rail guns before the spalling of the rails gets so bad that you're swimming in your own plasma. Non-contact mag launchers have similar issues with magnetic field strength increasing exponentially with velocity, until you are blowing the mechanism apart. (The solution is to widen the gap between the accelerator rings, as you move further along the tube, so the pulse-per-second requirements are the same. But that drastically increases the required length of the launch tube for higher velocities.)<br /><br />- If you exit the launch tube within the atmosphere, you are hitting a shock boundary that <i>will</i> shred your space-craft. It's not just a matter of sticking an ablative heat-shield up the front, it's not the heat alone it's the physical shock. That limits you to solid mass launches, bulk metal, maybe tanks of water (heavily reinforced tanks). Even running the launch tube up the side of a mountain isn't enough, even Everest isn't high enough. If you want to exit above the atmosphere, you need to build a 50-100km high tower. (That would be pretty cool, IMO. A series of 100km towers supporting a horizontal launch track.)<br /><br />- Big infrastructure costs up front. Which requires a high flight-rate to justify. Not a big counter-argument, IMO. SLS/Orion is receiving about $3 billion per year, so $24 billion between now and the first proposed crew launch in 2023, excluding the $10+ billion or so sunk-costs. That's $50 billion between now and 2032, the proposed date of the full mature system, plus sunk costs. $50b should be plenty to build a giant mag-gun launcher.<br /><br />- You are limited to a single launch trajectory. Your system is thus limited to a single purpose (supplying cargo to ISS or equivalent, for example.) That's a big killer for flight-rate. But again... SLS/Orion... $50b... dozen missions per decade...<br /><br />My favourite crazy launch scheme is the nuclear Verne gun.<br /><br />You drill a tunnel several kilometres down into a salt dome. Excavate a space, fill it with water. You fill the bottom portion of the tunnel with a compressible medium (say oil), with your payload on top. At the centre of the water-cavity, you detonate a kiloton nuclear warhead. Water flashes to steam, pushes the oil like a piston, ramming the payload up the tunnel at escape velocity. Properly designed, very little radiation escapes the tunnel.<br /><br />Variation: Open ocean. You build a tube several kilometres long, filled with compressed air. You detonate a nuke at the bottom of the tunnel. Water is fairly incompressible, so the tube becomes the weak-point for the steam to escape. Same result as the salt-dome, except even less radiation escapes to the atmosphere, and the ocean currents dilute the rest.<br /><br />The cool thing is, you can lift thousands of tonnes to escape velocity with a single blast. Enough to kickstart a moon colony, say.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-42834864535342188742015-09-19T15:13:35.200-07:002015-09-19T15:13:35.200-07:00VCs also thought that they knew better than energy...VCs also thought that they knew better than energy companies and invested massively in cleantech. And the result...a major bust and loss of capital.<br /><br />Mining companies have been quite willing to take risks (deep water drilling, arctic drilling) with mixed results. At this point nobody is even certain that asteroid resources can even be owned by a corporation, yet more uncertainty. Tech billionaires eying resources are taking a huge risk. Note that Elon Musk, perhaps the most successful NewSpace entrepreneur to data, is going for existing markets where the payoff is more certain. I'm sure he would happily sell a rocket shovel to the prospective miners.<br /><br />So far Planetary Resources has designed a small scale Arkyd telescope to do early asteroid observations. Everything else is just vaporware. You can read what PR has to say about asteroids <a href="http://www.planetaryresources.com/asteroids/" rel="nofollow">here</a>. They seem pretty hot for water.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-42955072065131121832015-09-19T14:49:55.973-07:002015-09-19T14:49:55.973-07:00Alex Tolley,
The big mining companies are the las...Alex Tolley,<br /><br />The big mining companies are the last ones who would invest in a venture such as this. Their capital is already tied up in existing mines and have no incentive to go into space. To give an example in 2014 venture capitalists invested 48 billion Dollars (figures from Price-Waterhouse) in various projects. This just in one year and is steadily increasing year after year and these figures are only for the US. There are vast amounts of money in the world looking for good projects. If something is proven promising the money will come. You can’t depend on companies who already have an established position to make the investment. It just isn’t in their interest. Venetian capital never invested in exploration to the Spice Islands because that would have undermined their existing business. It was the Portuguese, the Dutch and the Spanish who had the incentive to break Venice’s and their Arabic partners’ monopoly on the spice trade and the same is true today. <br />Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-51614336558851980412015-09-19T13:53:46.291-07:002015-09-19T13:53:46.291-07:00I'm curious if there has ever been study of mo...I'm curious if there has ever been study of mounting a rocket (probably solid fuel) on steep railgun, accelerating it to higher g than people can take, and adjusting final orbit or trajectory with the rocket. For cargo, obviously.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-86372167387666882342015-09-19T13:49:09.390-07:002015-09-19T13:49:09.390-07:00That big mining companies are not looking to mine ...That big mining companies are not looking to mine asteroids should be telling you something. [The unique mineral was to make a point, not to suggest that it could happen or be looked for. If there is anything like that, it will be a serendipitous find].<br /><br />The largest mineral extraction Exxon, spends ~ $35 bn on exploration and capital mining equipment annually for all its global operations. That doesn't make Nasa's $18 bn budget look like chicken feed to me. I would guess that Exxon couldn't afford to spend more than 25% of its budget on space mining development, even if the exploration work and R&D for micro-g mining techniques was already accomplished by a government agency. A consortium might be able to raise teh funds necessary, but teh high risk makes this unlikely IMO.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-59437531576564960302015-09-19T13:30:37.731-07:002015-09-19T13:30:37.731-07:00Alex Tolley,
Expecting to find an unknown ele...Alex Tolley, <br /><br /> <br />Expecting to find an unknown element may be just a bit too far as a driver for space exploration unless we find magnetic monopoles as in Larry Niven’s books. It is better to count on what we already know exists because we can calculate its worth in the market today and make estimates the costs of extraction which is the basis of all business decisions and therefore determines whether investment is worth it or not. Governments can spend the money just to see what is there but businesses cannot. Unless NASAs budget is increased tenfold space exploration will remain scanty. NASAs budget is now around $18 billion a year. That is chicken feed for major corporations. If they have a reason to invest in space (profits) then they could easily invest much much more. If the prospects are good enough you could raise many billions in an IPO for example. We must not underestimate the power of finance to raise enormous amounts of money. If there is a scent of profit the money will be there. That is why Edmund Musk and others are involved. They know that if the prospects become realizable then they will have investors standing in line to throw money at their projects.<br />Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-14706207495412083922015-09-19T13:00:50.512-07:002015-09-19T13:00:50.512-07:00Dr. Brin,
I would like to come back to Star Trek....Dr. Brin,<br /><br />I would like to come back to Star Trek. It is a favorite or yours and of mine. I recently ran into an article that discussed its “art” aspect and the moral content. I must say that it lit up a light bulb in my head and enlighten me to the reasons of the continuing popularity of the show. I would love to say that these ideas are of my own origin but I cannot. <br /><br />The dialogue between Spock and Kirk is what makes Star Trek great. It gives two diametrically opposed views of reality. Spock is intellectual and as many intellectuals can make an argument justifying almost any form behavior while Kirk has a visceral feeling about what is right and what is wrong. He does not ponder and analyze what he sees but just knows what is good and what is bad and acts accordingly. Spock on the other hand tries to see the other side of things. Giving these two moral interpretations is what gives the series its strength and its appeal. Neither view is either totally right or totally wrong. It is due to Gene Roddenberry’s genius who was able to maintain this tension between two opposing views thereby engaging the audience in moral questions that are eternal to the human condition. This moral duality is severely lacking in science-fictions movies and series today. They present either one or the other view and do not mix them together as did Star Trek. One exception is Continuum but they are some others. Is it better to work for Big brother or to work for a warlord? The correct choice is neither but then which path must the person take? Most movies and series prefer to stay in the “grey area” without giving resolution to the dilemma but Star Trek never did that. It took a stand. In the Star trek series not making a choice for whatever reason was never an option and that is what made it great.<br />Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-80870699260639666652015-09-19T12:52:01.214-07:002015-09-19T12:52:01.214-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-62851348869432610152015-09-19T12:39:25.898-07:002015-09-19T12:39:25.898-07:00@Deuxglas. I agree with the thrust of your argume...@Deuxglas. I agree with the thrust of your argument. However, people have looked at the issue of asteroid mining for precious metals and returning them to Earth for sale and it doesn't work at this point. It may do in future, but not today or the near future. What really would need to happen is to find some new mineral that has extremely useful properties that cannot be found on Earth or is so rare that it costs much more to extract on Earth than from an asteroid. Alternatively make mining on Earth very expensive/difficult so that space mining can compete.<br /><br />Water has the advantage of being needed in bulk for space activities and this Mass is expensive to ship up from Earth. Asteroidal water may work out cheaper to acquire, especially for deep space missions than shipping up from Earth. As always, economics will near on this issue and a new cheap access to space technology could change the business case. Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-29541451203738383112015-09-19T11:57:10.316-07:002015-09-19T11:57:10.316-07:00CORRECTION:
I meant the 16th Century and not the ...CORRECTION:<br /><br />I meant the 16th Century and not the 15 Century.Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-47949417378865250932015-09-19T11:56:56.045-07:002015-09-19T11:56:56.045-07:00CORRECTION:
I meant the 16th Century and not the ...CORRECTION:<br /><br />I meant the 16th Century and not the 15 Century.Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-58990366354136008532015-09-19T11:54:34.713-07:002015-09-19T11:54:34.713-07:00Alex Tolley,
Of course the up-front costs are eno...Alex Tolley,<br /><br />Of course the up-front costs are enormous which means that you need a lot of seed money to begin with (excuse my hanging adjectives). Perhaps that is why we should have faith in billionaires who believe and are willing to risk their capital for a dream and hopes for eventual profit that would dwarf anything we know today. The age of the great explorations was financed in the beginning by government but entrepreneurs rapidly entered the game and reaped enormous profits from the trade setting up trade networks, plantations and in themselves controlling vast tracks of territory. To me it seems that we are at the same point as in the 15th Century when it comes to space exploration. At that time to set up an expedition to the other side of the world was horrendously expensive but those ships who returned laden with spices returned a 1000% on investment to their backers. When you come down to it, it is the profits to the investors that will drive space explorations, not glory or the advancement of the human race. If they can find things there to sell at a fantastic profit to Earthlings then it will happen and quicker than you think. You talk about using water as fuel but that is just a small detail in the story. It is just engineering and will be resolved quickly. It is money and the desire for profit that will drive us forward as it has throughout history in every successful culture.<br />Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-73327854159159880922015-09-19T10:34:27.625-07:002015-09-19T10:34:27.625-07:00@Deuxglas - space operations would have to be very...@Deuxglas - space operations would have to be very much cheaper for your bootstrapping suggestion to work. At this point the high cost to even getting to an asteroid, the unknowns regarding mining and refining techniques, plus the market impact on pricing makes this a high risk proposition today.<br /><br />The best use of asteroid resources is to use them in off-Earth applications. Water is the best example, as it is easier to extract with a little heat and collect (bag it, or pump it out from reservoirs), and use it for fuel, propellant and life support. Cost to ship water to space is high, requiring recycling to minimize that cost. A lower cost fresh water supply in volume would be one of the best drivers for reducing deep space mission costs, as well as supplying life support for extra-terrestrial facilities. Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-58909331692498028552015-09-19T07:46:08.951-07:002015-09-19T07:46:08.951-07:00Dr. Brin,
When you say “excellent science fiction ...Dr. Brin,<br />When you say “excellent science fiction stories portraying plausible early stages in humanity accessing and using space resources” I assume you mean stories that give good technical ideas and not necessarily a well-written piece of literature. If that is true then we must look to the more obscure early SF stories that didn’t survive the test of time. I will have to give that a good think before I come up with something.<br /><br />Returning wealth to Earth: <br /><br />The Mass Driver in “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.” By Robert Heinlein. I can’t think of a cheaper and better way to get the material back to Earth. If the wealth is energy then we have to look into Gerald O’Neil’s vision of microwave beaming. <br /><br />Bagging asteroids to solar heat them and get water:<br /><br />Larry Niven’s belter stories describe ice mining from asteroids as well as turning them into living habitats (Troy) first by filling the interior with ice, then melting using mirrors. The ice becomes steam and inflates the asteroid forming a hollow interior which is then spun simulating gravity. This idea is seductive but I found several drawbacks notably that there is no way to guarantee a uniform shell integrity. Cracks and bubbles would form making the shell structurally weak for example or that even with a large mirror the time necessary to turn the asteroid into lava would be very long.<br /> <br />Bootstrapping: <br /><br />That means getting lots of revenue very quickly to pay off the venture. If you are smelting ore in an asteroid to make building material then the by-product of that would be a lot of gold and platinum meaning it has a low marginal cost. Use a mass-driver to send it to Earth using parachutes in the atmospheric stage. 30 tons of gold or platinum equals around 1 billion Dollars. Even refined ore would be good enough to guarantee a good payoff. Unfortunately SF writers ignore the economic side. <br />Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-39382900366097252352015-09-19T03:39:00.778-07:002015-09-19T03:39:00.778-07:00I would like to respond to locumranch.
locumranch...I would like to respond to locumranch.<br /><br />locumranch said...<br />“The majority of scientific research results cannot be replicated or reproduced:”<br /><br />You are missing the point of scientific research. You do not have to replicate the majority of scientific papers to further scientific progress. What you need to do is replicate the ones showing promise or presenting a new idea or avenue. In this sense even a paper with flaws has value. This is true especially in the hard sciences and I exclude those papers that are outright fabrications which, fortunately, are rare. <br />Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-82110149429930286032015-09-18T23:07:32.991-07:002015-09-18T23:07:32.991-07:00Duncan nice list! Thanks also Locumranch.Duncan nice list! Thanks also Locumranch.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-2834084601292698552015-09-18T20:27:20.569-07:002015-09-18T20:27:20.569-07:00@locumranch: Dude. Your stuff is too dense for me ...@locumranch: Dude. Your stuff is too dense for me tonight. 8)<br /><br />Science should serve other fields. It’s not something to be placed on a pedestal and worshipped. It is a tool to use to carve away falsehoods from the body of knowledge. Hopefully there is something left to appreciate.<br /><br />Truthiness is a squishy thing to say. Human corruptibility is expected. That’s why you need lots of people doing science. We don’t all corrupt ourselves for the same end purpose, so conflict is ensured.<br /><br />Of course humans lie. More importantly, we lie to ourselves. Delusion is probably the truth we know best without realizing we do. Fortunately, we do not all delude the same way. Conflict is ensured. Find the courage to accept honest criticism, though, and one might bypass some delusions.Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-24620117288791782302015-09-18T20:19:30.230-07:002015-09-18T20:19:30.230-07:00Mining the atmosphere for carbon... hmm.
Isn'...Mining the atmosphere for carbon... hmm.<br /><br />Isn't that what plants did way back before the microbes figured out how to break down the lignin they produced? Isn't that where our oil and coal comes from?<br /><br />Is art finally imitating life? 8)Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-20173814061288336172015-09-18T19:31:10.791-07:002015-09-18T19:31:10.791-07:00'The Martian Way', first published in Gala...<br />'The Martian Way', first published in Galaxy Mag 1952, by Isaac Asimov.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-80813798717665497602015-09-18T19:15:40.961-07:002015-09-18T19:15:40.961-07:00Add Poul Anderson - e.g. "Tales of Flying Mou...Add Poul Anderson - e.g. "Tales of Flying Mountains"<br />Allen Steele - his earlier work like: "Sex and Violence in Zero-G" (collection)Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-1057978894648715872015-09-18T18:44:39.681-07:002015-09-18T18:44:39.681-07:00“I need your help! Name and source-cite excellent ...“I need your help! Name and source-cite excellent science fiction stories portraying plausible early stages in humanity accessing and using space resources. Bagging asteroids to solar heat them and get water? Using mirrors to melt them for metals?”<br /><br />Nae tother aba!<br />That is what I thought – there are lots<br /><br />So I went through my library (Collectorz.co)<br />To my total horror books like that are rare – not hens teeth but not common<br />And most of them are quite old<br /><br />Ben Bova<br />Lots of titles – no engineering but no major idiocies<br /><br />Charles Sheffield<br />Not much “near term” but The Web between the worlds has some asteroid capture and use<br />http://www.amazon.com/Web-Between-Worlds-Charles-Sheffield-ebook/dp/B00C69IJ56/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1442625905&sr=8-1&keywords=charles+sheffield+web<br /><br />Donald Kingsbury<br />The Moon Goddess and the Son, To bring in the steel<br />Not available on Kindle –<br /><br />Larry Niven<br />The Descent of Anansi, The Dream Park series, Footfall<br />(The decent must have the absolute worse blurb I have ever read – nothing to do with the book at all)<br /><br />Arthur C Clarke<br />Lots of different titles<br /><br />Michael Flynn<br />Firestar – long time since I read these – not sure how useful they are<br /><br />Robert L Forward<br />Dragon’s Egg, Rocheworld, Martian Rainbow<br />http://www.amazon.com/Dragons-Egg-Del-Rey-Impact-ebook/dp/B004G8PJDA/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8<br /><br />David Gerrold<br />The Dingilliad trilogy – not sure if it’s useful he is such a pessimist about our future<br /><br />Jack C Haldeman<br />High Steel<br /><br />Peter F Hamilton<br />Good stuff but a bit too far away<br /><br />Robert Heinlein<br />Lots of different titles<br /><br />John McLoughlin<br />Helix and the sword – bit far away after earth is depopulated<br /><br />Frederick Pohl<br />Mining the Oort<br /><br />Jerry Pournelle<br />Higher Education, <br />http://www.amazon.com/Higher-Education-Jerry-Pournelle-ebook/dp/B00BC2IG56/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1442626752&sr=1-1&keywords=jerry+pournelle+higher+education<br />Allen M Steele<br />Rude Astronauts<br />http://www.amazon.com/Rude-Astronauts-Near-Space-Book-5-ebook/dp/B00EJ3FARC/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1442626675&sr=1-1&keywords=steele+rude<br />There are these – books about space stations in SF – not on Kindle so I haven’t read them<br />http://www.amazon.com/Other-Side-Sky-Annotated-Bibliography/dp/1434457494/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1442625961&sr=8-4&keywords=donald+kingsbury+to+bring+in+the+steel<br />http://www.amazon.com/Islands-Sky-Literature-Philosophy-Criticism/dp/1434403564/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1442625961&sr=8-3&keywords=donald+kingsbury+to+bring+in+the+steel<br />duncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25744424717479444572015-09-18T17:14:30.202-07:002015-09-18T17:14:30.202-07:00This same technology that extracts CO2 from the at...This same technology that extracts CO2 from the atmosphere and turns it into carbon fiber could be used to terraform Venus. from a previous thread:<br /><br />A. Total Mass of Venus Atmosphere 4.80E+20 kg<br />Percent Atmosphere CO2 96.50% <br />Total Mass of CO2 4.63E+20 kg...<br /><br />Suppose we convert all that carbon into physical structures (sun shades, floating habitats, etc.) made out of carbon fiber which is stronger than steel? We would create a mass of carbon fiber equivalent to a layer almost two football fields thick over the entire planet’s surface:<br /><br />H. Density of Carbon Fiber 1.600 g / cm^3<br />1,600,000.000 g / M^3<br />1,600.000 kg / M^3<br /><br />Ratio of C to CO2 (12 / 44) 0.273 <br />Available Mass of C 1.26E+20 kg<br /><br />Volume of resultant Carbon Fiber 7.90E+16 M^3<br />7.90E+07 kM^3<br />Thickness of Carbon Fiber 0.172 kMDPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07087941506162882852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-45703572879165325402015-09-18T16:49:33.658-07:002015-09-18T16:49:33.658-07:00I need your help! Name and source-cite excellent ...I need your help! Name and source-cite excellent science fiction stories portraying plausible early stages in humanity accessing and using space resources. Bagging asteroids to solar heat them and get water? Using mirrors to melt them for metals? Returning wealth to Earth? Using the materials to bootstrap our presence in space? Sure I am talking about "analog-type" can-do problem-solving tales. Ideally with links to access them and share them with... well... shall we say folks at a very high level? Folks who might help make these dreams come true.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.com