Re: ISS after completion

On Nov 16, 5:12 am, Harmon <harmon.ever...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 14, 9:23 pm, "Jonathan" <wr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

news:1195060032.871569.8140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<snip>

Another wasteful cold-war like space race with the
Chinese. Or Space Solar Power.

I know which choice is more likely to destroy us.
And which could save us.

Jonathan

s

I agree space solar power is definitely a way to go to make space more
beneficial. I just don't think it has much to do with the problem I
am thinking about right now - what to do with the ISS.

I also agree. So, how many yaysay votes do we get for the relocating
of ISS to Venus L2?


I had considered if the ISS could make any profit from helping develop
space power stuff, infrastructure, satellites or so, but think that
independent power satellites are much more likely to happen, more
easily. I'd love to be wrong about that, but I don't see the ISS as
being able to add anything, such as being a bunkhouse for a space
power satellite construction crew.

ISS as a safety habitat or somewhat go-between might be of some use,
but since our moon's L1 as a Clarke Station sort of ISS application is
taboo/nondisclosure rated, and simply too damn hot and gamma radiated
to death, is what pretty much eliminates that option. However, Venus
L2 is quite another cool and least gamma radiated option.
--
Brad Guth
.