Re: SPS ERoEI is excellent
- From: Totorkon <aertrion@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 22:34:29 -0700 (PDT)
On Sep 21, 10:21 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Totorkon <aertr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:
:Of course it is likely that kerosene or liquid methane will be the
:fuel and when compared to the electricity these fuels would produce, a
:single month of sps output would effectively equal the total energy
:cost of manufacture, transportation and assembly, including that of
:the launch vehicles, ion engines and construction 'bots'.
:
So why do you think nobody is pouring money into this if it's such a
great deal?
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
Twenty thousand dollars per installed kW, just for transportation to
orbit, for starters. Then there is the scale, anything under 5GW is
impractical.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: SPS ERoEI is excellent
- From: Fred J . McCall
- Re: SPS ERoEI is excellent
- From: Pat Flannery
- Re: SPS ERoEI is excellent
- References:
- >>> today I've updated my "Space Solar Power hoax/illusion DEBUNKED" article with a VERY DETAILED analysis/evaluation of SSP's weights, dimensions and costs >>>
- From: gaetanomarano
- SPS ERoEI is excellent
- From: Totorkon
- Re: SPS ERoEI is excellent
- From: Fred J . McCall
- >>> today I've updated my "Space Solar Power hoax/illusion DEBUNKED" article with a VERY DETAILED analysis/evaluation of SSP's weights, dimensions and costs >>>
- Prev by Date: Re: SPS ERoEI is excellent
- Next by Date: Re: SPS ERoEI is excellent
- Previous by thread: Re: SPS ERoEI is excellent
- Next by thread: Re: SPS ERoEI is excellent
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|