DOES THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT HAVE THE RIGHT TO REOPEN NUCLEAR PLANTS LOCATED IN SISMIC OR TSUNAMI RI (134)
SUNSHINEB0YI was about ready to tell albert the same thing. He quotes out of context to impose his opinions on others and to apply his own Agenda.
SUNSHINEB0Y: and by the way if you are going to keep quoting excerpts from my posts, I'd thank you to keep them in context, if you'd read and included the previous sentance with your post it would have answered your stupid question.
Actually, it changes nothing which is why I didn't bother filling up pages of hubris with unnecessary quotes to get to the point.
SUNSHINEB0Y: quote
as you so correctly state, financing is the key and some peeps think that the bulk of the research is being left to the companies that are making the money out of oil at the moment, I don't know but if it is then this brings a conflict of interest untill the oil is about to run out.
I think this is one area where the capitalist system doesn't work well and it should not be left to individuals to compete, I don't mean we should stop them but there should be a world research fund to sort out something that suits everyone, idealy. unquote
as you so correctly state, financing is the key and some peeps think that the bulk of the research is being left to the companies that are making the money out of oil at the moment, I don't know but if it is then this brings a conflict of interest untill the oil is about to run out.
I think this is one area where the capitalist system doesn't work well and it should not be left to individuals to compete, I don't mean we should stop them but there should be a world research fund to sort out something that suits everyone, idealy. unquote
And your qualifications to offer this suggested change of the entire method by which the world has arrived at this level of development after millenia are .........?
SUNSHINEB0Y: I never said it couldn't do this, I just recognized that the private investment sector would put profit as it's aim, first and foremost, if there was another body that had the primary goal of making the alternatives safety and sustainability the first priority then that's what private investors would have to compete with.
I don't think that even the most staunch supporters of nuclear power, who have any sense, want to see the earth and it's people contaminated, ill and dead from the effects of events like the one at chernobyl or japan or even the lesser events like windscale and three mile island otherwise there wouldn't be any research and developement put into safer ways of doing things, and certainly the cost of the healthcare given to these peeps is never taken into account when providing figures for nuclear power, my point is that nothing we do is failsafe or terrorist proof into the future, terrorists don't need nuclear bombs when there are facilities like these available and even if we can guard against terrorists we cannot even guard against the nature of our planet let alone what comes from beyond. This is proven. What we can do is make sure that when things do go wrong, the consequences are limited.
I don't think that even the most staunch supporters of nuclear power, who have any sense, want to see the earth and it's people contaminated, ill and dead from the effects of events like the one at chernobyl or japan or even the lesser events like windscale and three mile island otherwise there wouldn't be any research and developement put into safer ways of doing things, and certainly the cost of the healthcare given to these peeps is never taken into account when providing figures for nuclear power, my point is that nothing we do is failsafe or terrorist proof into the future, terrorists don't need nuclear bombs when there are facilities like these available and even if we can guard against terrorists we cannot even guard against the nature of our planet let alone what comes from beyond. This is proven. What we can do is make sure that when things do go wrong, the consequences are limited.
Profit is good as it entices production. As for safety and sustainability, there is no profit in paying out huge settlements. The downward trend in tobacco companies stock illustrates this.
SUNSHINEB0Y:
and on the subject of the "idiot box" as you like to call it, we never had one in the house I grew up in till I was 15 yrs old, but I do miss the days when my house was full of kids and laughter and the tv was on for them.
I still have a tv and I find it can be quite informative sometimes, it was on there I first heard of the pelamis. my tv doesn't have an I.Q. but that doesn't make it or me an idiot. If idiotic stuff comes onto your screen it's you who has the control to switch it off or change channel.
Seems I'm not the only one who could be accused of speaking about things of which they have no knowledge huh?
and on the subject of the "idiot box" as you like to call it, we never had one in the house I grew up in till I was 15 yrs old, but I do miss the days when my house was full of kids and laughter and the tv was on for them.
I still have a tv and I find it can be quite informative sometimes, it was on there I first heard of the pelamis. my tv doesn't have an I.Q. but that doesn't make it or me an idiot. If idiotic stuff comes onto your screen it's you who has the control to switch it off or change channel.
Seems I'm not the only one who could be accused of speaking about things of which they have no knowledge huh?
So at fifteen you began to watch Warner Bros and Foghorn Leghorn?
SUNSHINEB0Y: It isn't everybody that thinks lying is a good thing, there have been polls about it on cs!
I certainly don't think it's a good thing either which is why I discounted John's video for the lie they uttered ("What if we could remove the motivation for energy wars like our two military adventures in Iraq?")
johnaustin123: SUNSHINEB0Y
I was about ready to tell albert the same thing. He quotes out of context to impose his opinions on others and to apply his own Agenda.
I was about ready to tell albert the same thing. He quotes out of context to impose his opinions on others and to apply his own Agenda.
Unlike your agenda which is posting vids that are full of lies. I provided only one quote from the vid and it was a lie. What is your agenda that you need to post lies John?
johnaustin123: SUNSHINEB0Y
I was about ready to tell albert the same thing. He quotes out of context to impose his opinions on others and to apply his own Agenda.
I was about ready to tell albert the same thing. He quotes out of context to impose his opinions on others and to apply his own Agenda.
thank you J, I'm sure we're not the only ones that have noticed, I'm getting a bit tired of his wilfull stupidity now so I'm going to start ignoring him, debate is one thing, being argumentative for the sake of it is quite another.
SUNSHINEB0Y: thank you J, I'm sure we're not the only ones that have noticed, I'm getting a bit tired of his wilfull stupidity now so I'm going to start ignoring him, debate is one thing, being argumentative for the sake of it is quite another.
Once people begin to insult others as you have me above, it is obvious they have no actual points but rather, simply agenda they cannot find the facts to support. I will be more than happy to have you ignore me however, I will continue to point out your errors and factual lies.
Gosh!
Albertaghost:
At least they aren't afraid to lie to push their agenda.
At least they aren't afraid to lie to push their agenda.
you said you liked lies!SUNSHINEB0Y: you said you liked lies!
I don't however, it seems John and you do.
Prove your point Albert about the videos being lies. Research on your own to find the facts. I haven’t seen one iota of facts produced from you other than to produce your own opinions.
I don’t use quotes very often because they are redundant.
My rule of thumb is that if I agree with someone, I’ll use an excerpt to give them a compliment. If I disagree with someone, I make sure that I quote the entire comment so that the poster is not taken out of context.
I don’t use quotes very often because they are redundant.
My rule of thumb is that if I agree with someone, I’ll use an excerpt to give them a compliment. If I disagree with someone, I make sure that I quote the entire comment so that the poster is not taken out of context.
johnaustin123: Prove your point Albert about the videos being lies. Research on your own to find the facts. I haven’t seen one iota of facts produced from you other than to produce your own opinions.
I don’t use quotes very often because they are redundant.
My rule of thumb is that if I agree with someone, I’ll use an excerpt to give them a compliment. If I disagree with someone, I make sure that I quote the entire comment so that the poster is not taken out of context.
Be real Fun when that Beam gets off track!I don’t use quotes very often because they are redundant.
My rule of thumb is that if I agree with someone, I’ll use an excerpt to give them a compliment. If I disagree with someone, I make sure that I quote the entire comment so that the poster is not taken out of context.
We can talk about all the ways to produce heat (combustion oxidation, nuclear reactions, other chemical reactions) or to take advantage of natural heat (solar, volcanoes, geysers), the possibility of applying it to steam engines or turbines connected to electrical generators, production of electric energy through other means (chemical reactions, temperature differences in a circuit, not many more may exist), the different ways to spin the rotor of a generator by other means (pelamis, windmills or watermills) drawling by animals or people through pedals or cranks, creating jobs, and lots of media transport and energy distribution resulting from all these methods and to install nuclear power plants on the moon and send electricity by these space method because there is not anyone's teeth will fall.
If you just want to have fun and fantasize.
I prefer to talk about the bussiness of energy, how can be easily addopted these other methods by the existing economic system to one where they fit, and preferably without ruining the current economic operators because otherwise the process of technical improvement will have a powerful opposition, and will hurt the economy, and will be slow.
Since the Industrial Revolution and before, technical improvements have been utilized by each sector and have been dedicated to making money in the same activity they are engaged regardless of the technical changes.
If you just want to have fun and fantasize.
I prefer to talk about the bussiness of energy, how can be easily addopted these other methods by the existing economic system to one where they fit, and preferably without ruining the current economic operators because otherwise the process of technical improvement will have a powerful opposition, and will hurt the economy, and will be slow.
Since the Industrial Revolution and before, technical improvements have been utilized by each sector and have been dedicated to making money in the same activity they are engaged regardless of the technical changes.
GUZMAN1Great Post!!!
GUZMAN1: We can talk about all the ways to produce heat (combustion oxidation, nuclear reactions, other chemical reactions) or to take advantage of natural heat (solar, volcanoes, geysers), the possibility of applying it to steam engines or turbines connected to electrical generators, production of electric energy through other means (chemical reactions, temperature differences in a circuit, not many more may exist), the different ways to spin the rotor of a generator by other means (pelamis, windmills or watermills) drawling by animals or people through pedals or cranks, creating jobs, and lots of media transport and energy distribution resulting from all these methods and to install nuclear power plants on the moon and send electricity by these space method because there is not anyone's teeth will fall.
If you just want to have fun and fantasize.
I prefer to talk about the bussiness of energy, how can be easily addopted these other methods by the existing economic system to one where they fit, and preferably without ruining the current economic operators because otherwise the process of technical improvement will have a powerful opposition, and will hurt the economy, and will be slow.
Since the Industrial Revolution and before, technical improvements have been utilized by each sector and have been dedicated to making money in the same activity they are engaged regardless of the technical changes.
If you just want to have fun and fantasize.
I prefer to talk about the bussiness of energy, how can be easily addopted these other methods by the existing economic system to one where they fit, and preferably without ruining the current economic operators because otherwise the process of technical improvement will have a powerful opposition, and will hurt the economy, and will be slow.
Since the Industrial Revolution and before, technical improvements have been utilized by each sector and have been dedicated to making money in the same activity they are engaged regardless of the technical changes.
I agree. That's what we've been trying to do
but I also agree with what you said about the political involvementjohnaustin123: Prove your point Albert about the videos being lies. Research on your own to find the facts. I haven’t seen one iota of facts produced from you other than to produce your own opinions.
I don’t use quotes very often because they are redundant.
My rule of thumb is that if I agree with someone, I’ll use an excerpt to give them a compliment. If I disagree with someone, I make sure that I quote the entire comment so that the poster is not taken out of context.
I don’t use quotes very often because they are redundant.
My rule of thumb is that if I agree with someone, I’ll use an excerpt to give them a compliment. If I disagree with someone, I make sure that I quote the entire comment so that the poster is not taken out of context.
Sure John. From the vid;
"What if we could remove the motivation for energy wars like our two military adventures in Iraq?"
As we know, the motivation for the first Gulf War was to come to the aid of a trading partner and remove a threat to the stability of the Middle East as per UNSC Resolution 660. Upon non compliance of all the ceasefire conditions from 660 - 1441 the ceasefire was nullified and the second part took place. the actual reasons for this were;
to get Iraq to comply with ceasefire terms
- to stop Iraq’s Inadvertence to UNSC resolutions
- to force Iraq to cease it’s violation of human rights
- to stop Iraq’s material breaches of UNSC resolutions
- to end Iraq’s WMD capability and aspirations
- to end repression of Iraq’s civilian population
- to force Iraq to return or cooperate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third country nationals
- to force Iraq to return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq,
- to end Iraqi Support for terrorism
- to show America has the will to help allies and destroy foes
- to depose a regional threat take in Saddam that would have to be dealt with sooner or later
- to force action from SA to take care of it's radicals
- to pressure other regimes in the area not to provide passive or active support to Jihadists
- to position US troops in the region in force to enable that pressure
- to aid their global and NATO mission by placing a Strategic Air Support base
- to support and help create an Arab democracy as an example to others.
As for this being about oil or energy, the US and it's allies received more oil from Iraq prior to the invasion than they have since as well, pretty much all of the contracts have gone to non US entities such as Russia, China and Asia making the contention that this was a war based on energy false.
Now, since this is a false presumption, we can only extrapolate that the rest of the vid is based on equally false presumptions.
Conrad73: Be real Fun when that Beam gets off track!
LOL! Make a nuclear accident look like child's play.
Do not know if anyone realizes that I do not think that all these alternatives are viable, but that obviously is the business of oil money fast and it's hard to get an honest business deal with the whole network politic-economic-military is related. You just have to see how much money is left producing countries and that some moves on the stock exchange and other pockets.
But what I said about the coal business also serves the oil, the developed countries and other least developed countries are convinced that the supply must be ensured.
Better no comments about the western ethical reasons of the war of Iraq and the deep respect its leaders feel for the rights of its inhabitants and the soldiers sent there.
But what I said about the coal business also serves the oil, the developed countries and other least developed countries are convinced that the supply must be ensured.
Better no comments about the western ethical reasons of the war of Iraq and the deep respect its leaders feel for the rights of its inhabitants and the soldiers sent there.
Space based solar will be a lot cheaper to implement than people think and the reason is simple. It will be implemented by corporations and not governments. Therefore it will be cheaper.
Space X has already begun work on one of the worlds largest rockets for far cheaper than what the US was willing to spend on just the prototype of a far smaller rocket.
Recently I have heard that the Space X booster may lift even bigger loads with a third or fourth booster attached. So I don't doubt that it is possible that in fifty years the Earth could be surrounded by a geostationary ring of solar stations, all owned by corporations and shareholders.
Having said all that I still believe that the future of power generation is going to be green micro reactors. The prospective returns are enormous and they produce very little waste and run for decades.
Space X has already begun work on one of the worlds largest rockets for far cheaper than what the US was willing to spend on just the prototype of a far smaller rocket.
Recently I have heard that the Space X booster may lift even bigger loads with a third or fourth booster attached. So I don't doubt that it is possible that in fifty years the Earth could be surrounded by a geostationary ring of solar stations, all owned by corporations and shareholders.
Having said all that I still believe that the future of power generation is going to be green micro reactors. The prospective returns are enormous and they produce very little waste and run for decades.
GUZMAN1: I'm not going to bother remembering what you think of Saudi Arabia, all Muslims in general and how you think these countries are at peace now.
Good. Because if you did remember you would find I have not said anything about SA or all Muslims in general except how 270 million people were killed during their conquests which is an historical fact. As for being at peace now, once again you are mistaken as I never contended that either.
GUZMAN1: Instead, I highly recommend reading my brief polls "WHERE WILL THE NEXT ATOMIC BOMB EXPLODE?" and especially one whose title is more or less "THE COMMENTS ABOUT RELIGION ARE RELIGIOUS OR POLITICS?".
Ah yes, WHERE WILL THE NEXT ATOMIC BOMB EXPLODE? The thread in which you didn't have a clue and had to ask others and get geopolitics explained to you. I learned a lot about you on that thread - how you had not considered space and NEO threats as well as how SA would probably be the next to test for the reasons which I explained.
As for the unsupported garbage you posted in THE COMMENTS ABOUT RELIGION ARE RELIGIOUS OR POLITICS? you are still well short of the 270 million deaths caused by Muslims to make your OP remotely factual.
GUZMAN1: This canadian scholar and historian presents there his interesting theories (he calls facts), that slightly contradict their views now exposed.
Actually, my facts are supported by the facts themselves which are contained in numerous UNSC Resolutions - 660 to 778 to be exact and, recalled and summarized in 1441. Fifteen member states which comprise the council ratified all of them including your government so, you won't have far to find the facts if you dare deal in them.
Albertaghost: Good. Because if you did remember you would find I have not said anything about SA or all Muslims in general except how 270 million people were killed during their conquests which is an historical fact. As for being at peace now, once again you are mistaken as I never contended that either.
Ah yes, WHERE WILL THE NEXT ATOMIC BOMB EXPLODE? The thread in which you didn't have a clue and had to ask others and get geopolitics explained to you. I learned a lot about you on that thread - how you had not considered space and NEO threats as well as how SA would probably be the next to test for the reasons which I explained.
As for the unsupported garbage you posted in THE COMMENTS ABOUT RELIGION ARE RELIGIOUS OR POLITICS? you are still well short of the 270 million deaths caused by Muslims to make your OP remotely factual.
Actually, my facts are supported by the facts themselves which are contained in numerous UNSC Resolutions - 660 to 778 to be exact and, recalled and summarized in 1441. Fifteen member states which comprise the council ratified all of them including your government so, you won't have far to find the facts if you dare deal in them.
Ah yes, WHERE WILL THE NEXT ATOMIC BOMB EXPLODE? The thread in which you didn't have a clue and had to ask others and get geopolitics explained to you. I learned a lot about you on that thread - how you had not considered space and NEO threats as well as how SA would probably be the next to test for the reasons which I explained.
As for the unsupported garbage you posted in THE COMMENTS ABOUT RELIGION ARE RELIGIOUS OR POLITICS? you are still well short of the 270 million deaths caused by Muslims to make your OP remotely factual.
Actually, my facts are supported by the facts themselves which are contained in numerous UNSC Resolutions - 660 to 778 to be exact and, recalled and summarized in 1441. Fifteen member states which comprise the council ratified all of them including your government so, you won't have far to find the facts if you dare deal in them.
Well, not if there will be others interested in reading these polls and see who of us read the international press and also understands what happens.
I guess you do not have read all these UNSC Ressolutions. I wonder what your tabloids would say about its contents.
In any case once you choose the wrong poll, too.
GUZMAN1: Well, not if there will be others interested in reading these polls and see who of us read the international press and also understands what happens.
The polls on this site show you are wrong.
GUZMAN1: I guess you do not have read all these UNSC Ressolutions. I wonder what your tabloids would say about its contents.
I have read them all and know the facts. You have not and remain clueless.
GUZMAN1: In any case once you choose the wrong poll, too.
Poll? Ah yes, the poll which says the Japanese people should have nuclear plants. So, since then we have devolved into using a lying video to support the contention that nuclear reactors are terrible things.
Actually in the near future the power that controls orbit will be the strongest power. If there is a third world war then expect some kind of orbital fracas in a similar way to how the aircraft errupted on the scene in world war 2.
Some examples;
Satellites that orbit the Earth every 24 hours, though not placed over the equator and a different distance from the Earth to counter the fact that their off-equator orbit would normally see the ground accelerate below them, would in the eye of the observer, travel north then slow and stop, before travelling south, and then slowing and stopping again. Of course they are not really doing that, it's just how they would appear as they orbited the Earth. Now put a ring of several hundred with a thousand steel bars on each and you have a potent weapon. They don't even need warheads. A thousand steel bars aimed at a carrier at high sped will sink it without any weapons and no gatlings are going to stop them.
Thats just one example. Can't be bothered writing others but there are many.
Some examples;
Satellites that orbit the Earth every 24 hours, though not placed over the equator and a different distance from the Earth to counter the fact that their off-equator orbit would normally see the ground accelerate below them, would in the eye of the observer, travel north then slow and stop, before travelling south, and then slowing and stopping again. Of course they are not really doing that, it's just how they would appear as they orbited the Earth. Now put a ring of several hundred with a thousand steel bars on each and you have a potent weapon. They don't even need warheads. A thousand steel bars aimed at a carrier at high sped will sink it without any weapons and no gatlings are going to stop them.
Thats just one example. Can't be bothered writing others but there are many.
Foxxie: Actually in the near future the power that controls orbit will be the strongest power. If there is a third world war then expect some kind of orbital fracas in a similar way to how the aircraft errupted on the scene in world war 2.
Interesting post. And, a valid concern to boot. Reminds me of the NEO project and how one of the ways of dealing with a problematic asteroid is to use a tractor to tow it out of the way for a near miss. Getting world consensus on the route to do so as it temporarily hovers over a potential 'target country' may make that consensus non existent or, a country that has a problem with another may use same to target same.
Foxxie: Actually in the near future the power that controls orbit will be the strongest power. If there is a third world war then expect some kind of orbital fracas in a similar way to how the aircraft errupted on the scene in world war 2.
Some examples;
Satellites that orbit the Earth every 24 hours, though not placed over the equator and a different distance from the Earth to counter the fact that their off-equator orbit would normally see the ground accelerate below them, would in the eye of the observer, travel north then slow and stop, before travelling south, and then slowing and stopping again. Of course they are not really doing that, it's just how they would appear as they orbited the Earth. Now put a ring of several hundred with a thousand steel bars on each and you have a potent weapon. They don't even need warheads. A thousand steel bars aimed at a carrier at high sped will sink it without any weapons and no gatlings are going to stop them.
Thats just one example. Can't be bothered writing others but there are many.
Yep,Kinetic Weapons!Some examples;
Satellites that orbit the Earth every 24 hours, though not placed over the equator and a different distance from the Earth to counter the fact that their off-equator orbit would normally see the ground accelerate below them, would in the eye of the observer, travel north then slow and stop, before travelling south, and then slowing and stopping again. Of course they are not really doing that, it's just how they would appear as they orbited the Earth. Now put a ring of several hundred with a thousand steel bars on each and you have a potent weapon. They don't even need warheads. A thousand steel bars aimed at a carrier at high sped will sink it without any weapons and no gatlings are going to stop them.
Thats just one example. Can't be bothered writing others but there are many.
Crude,but most effective!
Only needs a small Rocket-Engine and a relatively unsophisticated Computer!
Were mentioned in Clancy's "Red Storm Rising",and I wouldn't be surprised of some System like it was already circling!
It seems much more interesting to talk about the last thing that you are writing that the monothematic matter always exposed by these specimen of log with eyes, unable to differentiate concepts such "speed" and "bacon".
I thought long to use rail guns, not as a weapon, but as a method of propulsion for orbital devices, unmanned, of course.
The conventional tube artillery requires much less gunpowder than rockets and provides much longer range. You need only compare the range of a rocket and a mortar of the same size. But it causes a severe blow due to the initial acceleration and has other drawbacks that rail guns do not.
The rocket consume most of its propellant to achieve the initial acceleration. A rail gun can provide the initial thrust and does not prevent other rockets added for later phases.
That would serve to put in orbit the systems of which you speak, designing long rail guns sized progressive acceleration and also devices that speak, to resist vibration.
I thought long to use rail guns, not as a weapon, but as a method of propulsion for orbital devices, unmanned, of course.
The conventional tube artillery requires much less gunpowder than rockets and provides much longer range. You need only compare the range of a rocket and a mortar of the same size. But it causes a severe blow due to the initial acceleration and has other drawbacks that rail guns do not.
The rocket consume most of its propellant to achieve the initial acceleration. A rail gun can provide the initial thrust and does not prevent other rockets added for later phases.
That would serve to put in orbit the systems of which you speak, designing long rail guns sized progressive acceleration and also devices that speak, to resist vibration.
GUZMAN1:
I thought long to use rail guns, not as a weapon, but as a method of propulsion for orbital devices, unmanned, of course.
I thought long to use rail guns, not as a weapon, but as a method of propulsion for orbital devices, unmanned, of course.
Yea!!!!! I agree now, just stay away from a hate rant and we can keep this equilibrium.
Rail guns can push whatever into space however, a few problems exist in that first, a one ton block of steel shot into space has to fit into a capsule. Second, it has to be caught by something in order to be used which means that if, for example, it is shot into space form the earth at twenty thousand miles per hour, something in space has to be able to stop a twenty thousand mile per hour block of steel which is no big deal as they can use secondary rockets to handle it to the site needed.
As it has to escape the body from which it is being launched from it is far more economical to do it from the moon than the earth. However, at the speeds used to accelerate, sensitive equipment can't be sent but rather raw materials can. Hence, the raw materials are est sent from the moon rather than the earth.
Albertaghost: Yea!!!!! I agree now, just stay away from a hate rant and we can keep this equilibrium.
Rail guns can push whatever into space however, a few problems exist in that first, a one ton block of steel shot into space has to fit into a capsule. Second, it has to be caught by something in order to be used which means that if, for example, it is shot into space form the earth at twenty thousand miles per hour, something in space has to be able to stop a twenty thousand mile per hour block of steel which is no big deal as they can use secondary rockets to handle it to the site needed.
As it has to escape the body from which it is being launched from it is far more economical to do it from the moon than the earth. However, at the speeds used to accelerate, sensitive equipment can't be sent but rather raw materials can. Hence, the raw materials are est sent from the moon rather than the earth.
Rail guns can push whatever into space however, a few problems exist in that first, a one ton block of steel shot into space has to fit into a capsule. Second, it has to be caught by something in order to be used which means that if, for example, it is shot into space form the earth at twenty thousand miles per hour, something in space has to be able to stop a twenty thousand mile per hour block of steel which is no big deal as they can use secondary rockets to handle it to the site needed.
As it has to escape the body from which it is being launched from it is far more economical to do it from the moon than the earth. However, at the speeds used to accelerate, sensitive equipment can't be sent but rather raw materials can. Hence, the raw materials are est sent from the moon rather than the earth.
But, don't they have to get it to the moon first to launch it from there ?
Albertaghost: Yea!!!!! I agree now, just stay away from a hate rant and we can keep this equilibrium.
Rail guns can push whatever into space however, a few problems exist in that first, a one ton block of steel shot into space has to fit into a capsule. Second, it has to be caught by something in order to be used which means that if, for example, it is shot into space form the earth at twenty thousand miles per hour, something in space has to be able to stop a twenty thousand mile per hour block of steel which is no big deal as they can use secondary rockets to handle it to the site needed.
As it has to escape the body from which it is being launched from it is far more economical to do it from the moon than the earth. However, at the speeds used to accelerate, sensitive equipment can't be sent but rather raw materials can. Hence, the raw materials are est sent from the moon rather than the earth.
12'000m/sec=Escape-Velocity!Rail guns can push whatever into space however, a few problems exist in that first, a one ton block of steel shot into space has to fit into a capsule. Second, it has to be caught by something in order to be used which means that if, for example, it is shot into space form the earth at twenty thousand miles per hour, something in space has to be able to stop a twenty thousand mile per hour block of steel which is no big deal as they can use secondary rockets to handle it to the site needed.
As it has to escape the body from which it is being launched from it is far more economical to do it from the moon than the earth. However, at the speeds used to accelerate, sensitive equipment can't be sent but rather raw materials can. Hence, the raw materials are est sent from the moon rather than the earth.
Need Nuclear Reactors to produce the energy needed!
Spectacular!
Practical?
tomcatwarne: But, don't they have to get it to the moon first to launch it from there ?
Not raw materials. The moon has everything the earth has including iron and water. You can smelt it there, refine it and place it into blocks and shoot it into space using one sixth the gravity as you would need from earth.
That takes care of the bulk material but, specialized stuff can be made on earth and shot out at much higher expense.
More Threads
What I Lack In Vocabulary
How far is too far?
Icebergs Still Around
rarotonga
Salami, Salami, Baloney
Nature
Don Shits-In-Pants!!!
Reality Check
everything is changing
1830's Music
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
Today in Spain thousands of mills are installed in wasteland or other areas, the sheeps can graze anywhere without worry. No need for a single mill three miles high.
It is mandatory by law that hot water come from pipes heated by the Sun, it is necessary to produce or transport electricity or gas for heating.
Other climates allow other solutions, in France tested solar heat build up walls to build houses in the 60's. In my country it is warmer so investigated as installing air conditioning with no electricity, is not difficult.
So, the solution is the Law and the governments decissions, it's necessary to warrant safety and homollogate systems and this decissions not are industrial but politic.