Re: food from space

"Ian Parker" <ianparker2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8af009ac-d5bd-4922-970f-44fa61d2154d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Yellowstone is quite an interesting point. To "save the world" in the
case of a singular event like that it would be much better to
stockpile 1-2 years supply in (say) the Antarctic.

Interesting idea. Might be a good safeguard against more than one kind of
disaster.

I have yet another point to make about global warming. We are worried
about rising temperatures. Sunlight reaching the Earth could be
stopped in space. With Yellowstone in mind it might be as well to
build a system that could INCREASE the sunlight striking the Earth,
and penetrate, partially at least, the Yellowstone clouds.

That's a good argument for space-based sunshades over aerosols, and for
reflective sunshades over Fresnel lenses. It's true that Fresnel lenses
would experience less pressure from sunlight. But the advantage of a mirror
is that in a heartbeat (OK, over the course of several days or weeks) it
could be used to push climate in the opposite direction.

You can grow lots in a
desert provided you have water.

Nobody thought space habitats would be a bigger thing than did Gerard
O'Neill. But in his later book, "2081", he revealed that he also thought
covered cities and greenhouse agriculture would be big deals here on Earth.
While he mostly talked about making cities in frigid areas warmer, there
were also obvious applications for conserving water (and reducing
insolation) in desert climes.

--


Regards,
Mike Combs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We must be staunch in our conviction that freedom is not the sole
prerogative of a lucky few, but the inalienable and universal right of all
human beings... It would be cultural condescension, or worse, to say that
any people prefer dictatorship to democracy.

Ronald Reagan at Westminster Abbey, 1982


.