Re: Space travel not war

On Mar 25, 1:21 pm, BradGuth <bradg...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 25, 5:12 am, Quadibloc <jsav...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Mar 24, 3:35 am, Willie.Moo...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

Not well understood is that the banking and trading systems set up as
extensions to the Marshall Plan were designed to enforce a trading
regime that was permanently favorable to the United States.  It has
been known since the beginning that this advantage would be
temporary.  George Kennan and others who authored these plans to
maintain peace in the nuclear age that they would one day fail.  So,
alternatives would have to be developed.  These alternatives include
'direct military action to maintain US superiority' or 'alternatives
to the present control regime'.

Unfortunately the United States cannot maintain a disparity of income
through trade if it is at war with those it is trading with - so this
direct military action angle wasn't well thought out.  Also
unfortunate, is there appears that no alternative to the present
control regime has been seriously considered or pursued.

The obvious thing for the U.S. to do is to admit that wide-open
international trade leaves American jobs vulnerable to cheap imports,
and so dump the WTO and go back to the days when countries set their
own tariffs, and only let in the imports that they decide they can
afford once they total up what sales they can make in exports.

After all, we can't force other countries to buy our goods, and the
only other way to limit how much we import would be to contract the
economy, throwing people out of work. This is what we're doing now,
and that alternative should be the one that's unthinkable.

John Savard

I agree that each nation has to first look after its own before trying
to influence and/or benefit via others, by way of foremost setting a
good example that others would want to follow without having another
gun put to their head, of food taken from their lips, as well as
housing, education and medical care made unobtainable by those of us
that want to either directly benefit from or having control over every
scrap of fossil and nuclear energy, or else it's another war (hot or
cold) to be fought.

It seems entirely obvious that we can force global inflation if need
be of nearly 100%/year upon others by way of our global energy and
banking cartels, as well as by having perpetrated the likes of the
cold-war, 911 and of the totally bogus war in Iraq, with Iran as our
failsafe plan of action backup-war for continued profit takings at the
ongoing trauma and demise of others that we obviously don't give a
tinkers damn about.

Obviously you and others of your wussy kind go 100% along with
whatever our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) and of his brown-nosed
army of clown minions decide is best, and to think that Hitler would
not have had it any other way.

Can you specify and/or demonstrate your actions otherwise? (we all
know that Willie.Moo can't)
. - Brad Guth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

An apple bud cannot grow into an apple if the tree is poisoned. So it
is in the interest of all apples to make sure the tree is strong and
fresh.

Similarly, no nation can grow strong in a world beset by problems all
nations suffer from. So, it is in the interest of all nations to
resolve common problems and avoid common mode failures.

In the nuclear age, in the space age, the world has a number of common
issues that transcend the rights of nations. The first of these is
international terror. Closely connected to this is the right for any
nation to engage in warfare.

Why?

Because, any person, any group, any nation, with access to nuclear
weapons and the means to deliver it anywhere in the world in minutes,
is a threat to all. So, it is in the interest of all to eliminate
this possibility.

In the past the US had done this by supporting a strong military and
intelligence apparatus and using it without remorse or giving any
quarter - to maintain global nuclear peace. This has been primarily
achieved by denying ability rather than motivation. The free trade
structure was exploited to give the USA the dominant economic position
and some effort was made to maintain that. How does free trade
benefit the USA? Well, we conned our allies into build stuff for us
and selling it to us wholesale, and then sold it back to them retail.

With the attack of 9/11 and the rise of the European Union, and the
rise of China and India, both control systems are showing signs of
their age. Some feel, God forbid - that it is only a matter of time
before we are struck with terror nukes, and lose a few cities. We can
see China and Europe positioning themselves to take advantage of that
eventuality should it present itself - and doing precious little to
help the USA get loose nukes under control.

So, its up to us to admit that we've created much of the difficulty we
now face, and to come up with solutions that benefit us going forward.

One is to use low cost solar power in conjunction with our coal
deposits to become the world's largest energy exporter. Then,
transition to a hydrogen economy that allows the US to dominate energy
going forward.

The USA burns 6.8 billion barrels of oil each year, and imports 5
billion barrels. The USA burns 1.1 billion tons of coal each year and
300 million tons of natural gas.

By generating hydrogen and oxygen in sufficient quantity each year
from water and sunlight, and partially oxidating the 1.1 billion tons
of coal with 1.46 billion tons of oxygen - to produce 2.56 billion
tons of carbon monoxide - along with the energy normally produced by
the coal. The carbon monoxide is combined with 325 million tons of
hydrogen to produced 2.9 billion tons of methanol, the methanol is
dehydrated to produced di-methyl-ether, a replacement for diesel fuel,
the DME is dehydrated to produce butane, the butane is polymerized to
produced octane, the principal component of premium gasoline.

Other processes can produce other products. Sabatier to produce
methane from carbon-dioxide, Bergius from coal and hydrogen to produce
syncrude, including diesel fuel and aviation fuel.

In the end, the 1.1 billion tons of coal is converted to 8.8 billion
barrels of liquid fuels. This allows the US to export 3.6 billion
barrels of oil while leaving its imports and coal mining and oil
production unchanged - and elimiminating half its carbon foot
print. At $100 per barrel, this generates an export revenue of $360
billion per year - and eliminates $500 billion in expenses - a
positive impact on our balance of trade of $850 billion per year.

By adding more solar panels, more hydrogen is generated, and that is
exported as well - creating a mixed energy economy involving solar
synfuel and hydrogen. This gives the US dominance and allows up to $4
trillion per year in energy exports, providing a $4.5 trillion
positive impact on our balance of trade.

By adding solar power satellites that beam bandgap matched laser
energy to large solar panel arrays, solar panels are converted to
power receivers - and output is increased 20x over that of the solar
panel alone, with zero increase in cost on the ground. This allows
the US to dominate energy going forward, and trigger huge growth in
total demand worldwide. Special relationships with banking and
finance gives a new lease on life to US economy.

I mentioned earlier that our retail and banking functions are being
challenged by new providers overseas that are more closely aligned
with manufacturers overseas. This is addressed in the following ways;

First, by constructing a global wireless hotspot with a satellite
network, we can gain access to everyone throughout the world. Not
only does the service earn $100 billion or more outright by selling
phone, cable, and internet services - but it also is a vehicle for
delivery of advanced banking and financial services - and allows
implementation of micro-banking and provision of a seamless range of
services providing unprecedented economic freedom and mobility for all
people - while capturing the lion's share of the world's financial
income for the USA - and finding a home for the world's $40 trillion
of the world's liquid capital.

Second, by adding tele-robotic capabilities to this wireless service,
the USA can build manufacturing centers that take in raw materials
from around the world, and through tele-robotics low cost labor,
managed by US workers at the factory, and build products for sale in
the US and around the world by US based retail systems, and financed
through US based financial institutions - this also leveraged on the
marketing side off the global wireless hotspot.

This maintains the US in a dominant position going forward even while
the world grows faster than the rest of the USA.

One of the major difficulties in the world is that there isn't enough
to go around on this Earth. By tapping into off-world resources and
extra-terrestrial assets, this picture changes. The energy shortages
we take for granted today, disappear as soon as we cost-effectively
tap into the Sun, an off-world energy resource. In a similar way, all
other shortages disappear by developing off-world material resources.
The US has maintain missile and nuclear secrets throughout the cold-
war. These technologies are essential to the cost-effective
development of low-cost off-world development. After the steps
described above are well underway, this final step of off-world
development through low-cost industrial access to space ($10 per ton,
12 billion tons per year and growing, solar system wide access) - far
and away bigger, better and more capable than anything even dreamed of
(with the exception of Ted Taylor and Freeman Dyson) before now.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Practical space travel and unlimited growth
    ... that flow is given by the cost of imparting that momentum. ... World shipping today is approximately 6.5 billion tons loaded each ... Obviously, beamed energy from ... solar sources in space to any user throughout the solar system ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Space travel not war
    ... scrap of fossil and nuclear energy, or else it's another war (hot or ... no nation can grow strong in a world beset by problems all ... 300 million tons of natural gas. ... By adding more solar panels, more hydrogen is generated, and that is ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: forests on orbit
    ... for the desalination of sea water to be provoded by solar power, ... To move a metric ton to Earth orbit most energy efficiently from the ... asteroid belt requires that 1.72 tons of propellant be ejected at 8 km/ ... equivalent to less than 7,000 watts of continuous power. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: We can meet all our needs through space development
    ... expectations of 13% efficiency not 40% as you appear to assume with ... against conventional energy sources without government subsidy. ... By 2050 solar power could end U.S. dependence on foreign oil and slash ... I answer the cost questions below. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: We can meet all our needs through space development
    ... expectations of 13% efficiency not 40% as you appear to assume with ... against conventional energy sources without government subsidy. ... By 2050 solar power could end U.S. dependence on foreign oil and slash ...
    (sci.space.policy)