Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)
From: Rick Jones (foo_at_bar.baz.invalid.retro.com)
Date: 03/17/05
- Next message: Ian Stirling: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- Previous message: D Schneider: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- In reply to: David Summers: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- Next in thread: Dr John Stockton: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- Reply: Dr John Stockton: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 02:07:36 GMT
David Summers <david@ualmiles.com> wrote:
> Then why don't we use such things on Earth? Nuclear power is WAY
> cheaper in Mexico (or even Nevada compared to New York)!
> The fact is, transmitting power via cables over long distances is
> expensive. The grid uses nearby sources, not far away ones. Losses on
> long distance power cables become very large very fast.
Would the dark/night side of a lunar power grid be cold enough to be
more easily (than on earth) constructed from superconducting
materials?
rick jones
-- oxymoron n, Hummer H2 with California Save Our Coasts and Oceans plates these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :) feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com but NOT BOTH...
- Next message: Ian Stirling: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- Previous message: D Schneider: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- In reply to: David Summers: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- Next in thread: Dr John Stockton: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- Reply: Dr John Stockton: "Re: A Moon base is too far; an asteroid ship better alternative:)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|