Briefs: Not a jobs program; More policy talk

What seems to be lacking here is the fundamental understanding of the difference between a "make work" program and the generation of a wealth cycle. Grand coulée Dam makes 12 billion dollars worth of electricity every year. For some reason, Carter did not like big government programs. He not only didn't fund the government Space Solar Powersat program he had the studies witheld from the public to ensure a quiet death. This ensured that America would be addicted to overseas oil for at least another three decades, and since oil would still be a National Security issue, he indirectly set us up for future oil wars. Don't get me wrong I hear plenty from idiot conservatives who don't even want to drive hybrid electric cars, let alone full electrics. This is all really strange to me. At least Obama has seen the light and is now supporting nuclear power. Cash for clunkers should have been Cash for electrics, and the program should go on until we don't import a drop of oil from overseas. We need sixty percent of Americans driving battery cars, then we will have a built in storage capacity for all that wild clean energy! Why doesn't GM have a crash plan to sell ab all electric vehicle by the summer of 2010? I have seen articles about "9 second fast recharge stations". Why don't we start setting up fast charge electric freeways?? The answer will never be conservation alone, or nukes alone, or clean renewables alone. It will require all of these sources AND huge news sources like Space Solar Power. Today one third of all air pollution is coming from the third world and they use only five percent of the energy. They won't be able to match our standard of living without huge growth in availability of clean alternatives. Now we can sit on the sidelines and let other countries do it, or we can get back in the game, put people back to work and compete ourselves. It really is an economic war out there and we are down, and bleeding. Let's apply some direct pressure to our wounds, and get back in the game.

Posted by Tony Rusi at 03/10/10 05:30:44

Tony

GM has a crash Electric Vehicle Program it's the Chevy Volt. It looks good.
220 MPG using the EPA model.

Carter dumped the Space Solar power gig because it was silly. He was investing in Terrestrial Solar, Wind Power and Ethanol.

I believe Reagan removed the solar panels from the White House roof.

We can do a lot in this country but we have to stop exporting the jobs to China.

Posted by anon at 03/10/10 11:59:50

Space Solar Power satellites didn't make sense in the 1970's, and still don't even with current technology. At least there have been some materials science breakthroughs that have reduced the cost of manufacturing terrestrial-based solar panels to the point they are starting to become cost-effective.... assuming that the power generation is needed in remote areas that are awkward to put in long-distance power supplies.

I've increasingly seen solar panels pop up in areas that I drive around at which do precisely this sort of power generation, where the solar cells are being used for monitoring equipment of various sorts, and on cabins/vacation homes in extremely rural/wilderness areas. Yes, it makes sense to do that.

Space Solar Power may become cost-effective if you can get some manufacturing capabilities on the Moon or one of the LaGrangian points (with raw materials from the Moon or near-Earth asteroids), but that implies a sort of infrastructure that simply doesn't exist at the moment and an incredible capital outlay to get all of that put together.

If you are looking at cheap power generation, to me the most cost-effective solution is to push for nuclear fusion technologies, particularly something like the Polywell design or frankly anything other than the Tokamak. That may help out spaceflight in the long run as well, as nuclear rocketry (in all flavors) is the only real power source that can open the rest of the Solar System to manned spaceflight, and allow the building of genuine spaceships rather than spacecraft.

I keep repeating myself here, but any study and any attempt to generate electrical power in space via the photoelectric effect that ignores the power generation systems on the ISS, MIR, or Skylab is something simply not worth reading or even considering in the first place. Those are real systems that have or are operating in space with real hardware... with real problems and headaches to consider as well. I don't see any discussion about those issues from the starry eyed dreamers that keep bringing this concept up.

Getting back to the main topic, I'd have to agree that NASA isn't a jobs program and certainly shouldn't be treated as one. It is unfortunate that most congressmen do consider NASA and its contracts to be just that. Unfortunately, jobs will be cut with the new NASA budget proposal, and those jobs translate into votes by disgruntled constituents who will tend to vote for "throw the bums out" or "anybody but the guy who caused this".

BTW Clark, thanks for publishing that link. It is a source of space news that I haven't seen before.

Posted by Robert Horning at 03/10/10 13:01:58

The volt only goes 40 miles on electric. Space solar power is capable of completely replacing all fossil fuel burning on the planet. Solar panels do not work very well in cloudy rainy places like Seattle 8 months out of twelve. Space Solar power would make sense today if we could get the price to LEO down to 500 a pound. And the way to do that is with privitazation of the LEO market! Go get'em Lori!

Posted by Tony Rusi at 03/11/10 03:22:48

Your comment: Name: Website: E-mail:

Enter the string of characters appearing in the picture: Remember Me