The chord then again would attch to a huge power terminal which would be on a train on the equator spinning to stay correctly nder the moon all the time. As a bonus the cord itself would produce electiricity as it travels in the magnetic influence of the earth. - you see all minor problems can be overcome.

Seriously though - this moon idea is simply stupid (as mentioned) - there are lots of other alternative plans that pne can create if you can have the option of "we don't have the tech yet at all but it would be sweet".

Seriously with the money of one launch you could probably cover quite nice area of desert with solarpanels. There is plenty of room on earth to build solarplants - the cost is just too high (even down here on earth). Also all kind of maintenence and labour costly stuff should be no problem. We have plenty of people.

What interests me is solar chimney
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_chimney

The efficiency isn't that great but:

1 The strcuture is so robust that great areas could be utilized with relatively low cost.

2 the codensation resulting from heat differences can be used to collect water to be used for agriculture.

Heikki


edit:

there is a thread about it and it doesn't seem too hot idea after all:
http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic5275.html

One problem with PV in the deserts is the weather. The power can be interrupted by clouds at any time, and you have to deal with issues like weathering, corrosion, and sand/grime build-up on the panels. The panels must be enclosed in protective glass, and the fabrication of that glass would require massive energy. As of 1994, EIA stats show that 60% of the energy used in glass manufacturing comes from natural gas.

On the moon, on the other hand, there is no weather. It may also be possible, on the moon, to fuse glass with lens or mirror furnaces (i.e with free, inexhaustible energy). The daylight temperature on the moon is 123°C. You can cook food there with ordinary sunlight. You could freeze food too, at night or in the shadows, because the temperature is -173 °C. And wouldn't high temperature superconductors work in the shade/night on the moon? That would be convenient for power transmission, energy storage and maglev mining etc. Oddly enough, lunar soil (regolith) is a good insulator: "A habitat less than a meter beneath the surface of Luna will experience a very constant temperature equal to its mean surface temperature. That's about -9°F (-23°C). The lunar regolith is such a good insulator that the habitat will need a heat-rejection system even at night because of the heat given off by equipment and inhabitants of the lunar habitat."(LINK)Just for comparison, -23°C is higher than some sleeping bag ratings.

Another problem is energy transmission. In the U.S., the best spot would be the southwest, but what about areas which aren't near any deserts? Do they cover up farmland, or open space, or grassland, or forest, or tundra? Covering up the Sonoran desert with solar panels or algae farms is often mentioned, but the Sonoran desert is not a dead parking lot of sand. I've seen it many times, and it is very alive and beautiful. Covering it up will only increase the footprint of man, and is in no way an "environmental" solution. (Neither is burning coal, even with filters.)

Another problem is energy storage. What do you do when sun goes down on the Sonoran Desert? This is a very severe problem with all terrestrial solar. The solar has to be parasitic on a waste generating process, like nuclear or coal.

It's also interesting to consider the geopolitics of desert power. If a desert power technology can be established, deserts will function economically like dams. The power can only be transmitted so far, so deserts and their satelittes will function as cores of development, and desert-rich countries will become rich because they own the real estate. Las Vegas will boom like never before. Is it good for the US/Europe to switch from one form of power monopolized by desert nations to another form of power with the same problem? After all, when you talk about the "Sahara", you're actually talking about the property of Mauritania, Western Sahara, Morocco, Mali, Algeria, Niger, Chad, Libya, Egypt and Sudan. They'll nationalize the sands. The moon, on the other hand, doesn't belong to anybody. In fact, isn't the U.S. flag still flying up there?

In a word, the solution to peak oil is the grid. But (IMO) there are only two realistic, environmental ways to provide non-intermittent base power: nuclear and space solar (although hot dry rock may play a role at some point). I prefer the latter because it is 100% sustainable (non-peaking), eliminates toxic processes like uranium mining, and moves our footprint off-planet.

Hi guys, long time lurker, first time poster

I’m generally in agreement with John on this, as I think the only possible way to maintain an industrial society is to expand out into space. It seems obvious really as continuing endless growth is impossible in a finite system (Earth), so we must move into an infinite system (space). Unfortunately the great potential of space was not exploited when it should have been – post moon landings – and now we may have left it too late, though as JD pointed out, it’s worth attempting as it may prove to be our only chance.

However I think the LSP program is something that is more achievable as a long-term goal then as a short-term solution to the coming energy crisis. What is much more achievable in the short term (before the effects of PO kill all hopes of continuing space exploration), is space mining. The moon has much potential for development, though before we can build anything substantial (like the LSP) on the moon, we must first harvest the necessary materials from space. We cannot hope to construct everything necessary for space industrialism on Earth and then launch it into and break orbit. It’s simply too expensive to send large things to the moon.

What we must do is first begin mining/developing – in space - the basic materials required for space operations, such as propellants, shielding, and structural materials. This can be achieved in the short term, far more easily then setting up factories that produce complex objects such as solar panels. One possible plan is to extract liquid oxygen from lunar materials and supply it to low Earth orbit (LOX to LEO) for use as spacecraft propellant.

Another, potentially much more promising plan is asteroid capture. By sending a robotic Lander to an appropriate Near Earth Asteroid (NEA), we could push the asteroid into an Earth orbit to be mined for further space industrialism. There is an infinite wealth of valuable resources in asteroids, including volatiles and rare metals, which could be transported to Earth for consumption. As well as providing Earth with important resources, the right asteroid could in theory, supply most of the materials needed for a semi-closed space habitat. It could actually be possible to set up space stations constructed with shielding and structural materials mined from asteroids, and supplied with air, water and soil all obtained from asteroids.

If there is any chance at all for the continuation of industrialism, then exploiting space is the only option. We may have missed our chance to do it easily with cheap fuel, but we still have the ability to attempt it at this late stage. We should at least attempt it, for as John pointed out, what have we got to lose?

Here’s a great NASA link about mining space, [url= http://lifesci3.arc.nasa.gov/spacesettl ... 3/toc.html ]Exploring, Evaluating, and Mining
Nonterrestrial Resources[/url]

Omnitir has a good point. How about instead of placing all these solar panels on the moon how about putting them on a captured asteroid placed in geosyncronous orbit instead. The asteroid would have more valuable minerals. It could probaby make a supplemental income off of sending down chunks of precious metals to the earth.

I love science fiction, the possibilities are endless. I wonder how long it would take to nudge a medium sized asteroid into a geosynchronous orbit.

How about solar chimneys in the Sahara? Very cheap, very feasible, very powerful. An ocean cable from the Sahara to Europe, the USA and one to China is very doable. And a million times more feasible than lunar power stations.

Still, this kind of lunar fantasy concepts is important. They show us how much better earthly solutions are.

No, it is not. Its sitting in a storage vault in the Hollywood studios somewhere.


Forgive me if I'm wrong, but the grid is not any more sustainable than peak oil. The grid is just an energy carrier. The instant demand outstrips supply you have rolling blackouts. LSP will have to feed the grid, on demand, 24 hours a day. The receiver sites are already in place- they are U.S. military bases.

LSP will obviously be an outgrowth from the bureacracy that $1 trillion dollars put in place by Reagan's insane "Star Wars". If LSP gets the green light, defense contractors and the Pentagon will finally have what they've always wanted- space, and the entire world by the balls. The existence of LSP will justify creating the Star Wars system they've always wanted.

What if we fund LSP and it turns out like Star Wars? A multi-trillion dollar money pit sucking funds from the public and putting it in the pocket of big defense contractors. Its a win-win for them even if its a pipe dream.

It would take about two years, just to get the probe/robot to an appropriate asteroid. Considering that the robot would then need to begin complex automations in order to essentially turn the asteroid into a spacecraft, it would probably need another two years before even being ready to begin to nudge the asteroid. Then the return trip would probably take at least another two years. And of course designing and building such a program would also take several years. So I’d imagine we’d be waiting about a decade or so before the asteroid is parked in orbit. So yes, it’s a long-term, high-risk investment.

Still if it worked and we aimed for an NEA high in volatile gases, it would be rather helpful having several trillion tonnes of methane and other hydrocarbons delivered to the Earth in about ten years…

A much quicker payoff is the current plan NASA is developing of sending astronauts to the moon to develop our extraterrestrial (no, not aliens!) activities, including the extraction of liquid oxygen for use as spacecraft propellent. If the effects of PO aren’t as devastating as quickly as many people envision, then perhaps we can achieve something useful before it’s too late? Here’s hoping.



Oh come on, you don’t honestly believe the U.S. succeeded in fooling the world by faking the moon landings do you? It’s because of people that believe things like that, that make people think peak oil is just another extremism cult. There are massive amounts of evidence proving the U.S. went to the moon. There is zero evidence to the contrary. Stop watching Fox and get real.

April Fools.

Although I do kind of not believe it.



The CIA would like to remind you that all voice and data communications are monitored 24 hrs a day, around the globe.

That's Echelon. Do you believe that?

We must remember that not all terrestrial solar suffers from intermittency. I can think of ocean thermal that is also base load. Solar chimneys are also effectively base load. And of course, hydro is also base load. I think the moon based solar idea is not ready for prime time at the moment. There are many underinvestigated terrestrial options just begging to be given a chance coupled with the inevitable downscaling of our activities. These obviously should be pursued before ambitious moon based solar.

Why should we limit ourselves to the moon. I propose we construct a dyson sphere!



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere

Why bother? The governments/big corporations/stone masons or someone already have working perpetual motion/free energy machines ready to release at the last moment. They keep them in the same building as the equipment used to fake the moon landings, the alien spacecrafts, Elvis, and the Star Gate.

Haha. Some people actually believe we never went to the moon. Just so you know, we have. I can prove it right now. Fear:

Moon Hoax Debunked'd

It is my belief that within a few years time, building solar panels on the Moon could be done far easier than before, and the simple reason is personal fabricators. Now, the holy grail is using these fab-labs to reproduce themselves, which engineers are very close to achieving.

This is mainly a thought experiment.

My proposal has a lunar base launched, which will house a hydroponics unit, and quarters for perhaps up to four people, all engineers. This would work with with just telepresence from Earth too, and without the base.

The main machines to be launched to the Moon will be a solar-powered fab-lab and a solar-powered lunar dust mining machine. From here, building the solar panels will simply be an exercise in computer programming. Once deployed, the mining machine will begin mining the lunar dust for more materials. These materials will then be shipped to the personal fabricators, which will replicate itself. These two fabricators will then replicate themselves. One of the fabricators will design more minin equipment. When there are about eight fabricators, then there are more things that can be built, such as robotic constructors. It is possible to make a rocket entirely of lunar material, using solid rocket fuel (like the boosters on the space shuttle) using metals and oxygen. The robotic constructors can take the rocket parts constructed by the fabricators, and build a rocket.

Let's say that it takes two weeks for a fab-lab to reproduce, which is far too conservative of an estimate. If we leave out the construction of other machines such as miners, robotic constructors, etc., then we can have an extremely robust manufacturing system in a year. If each fabricator reproduces itself, then in less than a year, we will have 16 million fabrication units. Of course, many of these fabricators will go to work to produce other things, but in a year, there would still be millions of fabricators. Where there are enough of these fab-labs, construction of solar panels can begin, and robots will put these together.

There is another solar technology that can continue to produce energy even at night and on cloudy days: the SunDish. It uses a Stirling genset, which can be heated either with focused sunlight or by external combustion using landfill gas or methane. The Sundish was given a trial run at the Pentagon and later at the Pima Maricopa Indian reservation near Tempe, Arizona. At just 20-25kW per unit, it won't be powering the entire grid anytime soon, but it may provide a good solution for remote areas, industrial parks, etc.

It could work on all the hot air spouted by the military (would work even better in Congress or, above all, at the White House)