Daily reminder of how you are being robbed by not having a Space Elevator

We can build an Orbital Ring Space Elevator today, using steel and kevlar. The Orbital Ring goes to low earth orbit, so it does not need advanced materials.
youtube.com/watch?v=0qezLhypA0Y

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_ring

Why build the Orbital Ring? It would cut our costs of going to orbit from about $2000/kg to about $1/kg. There are individual asteroids that have tens of trillions of dollars in materials on them that could be mined. One mission could easily pay for the cost of building the Orbital Ring.

We could then deploy solar power satellites in orbit above cloud cover and return the power back to the surface with near zero loss by running power transmission cables down the elevator, and sell the power at a profit.

With increased luminosity in space, enhanced exposure time, and the ability to deliver base loads, solar panels pay for themselves in only 1-2 years while having a 20 year life time.

In other words, if you put $5 trillion of solar panels into space, you get your $5 trillion back by the end of year two and a $5 trillion income stream each year thereafter.

In other words, the US could cut everyone's taxes, both personal and business, income, capital, death, or otherwise, all to 0%, not even cut any benefits or current spending, and pay off the national debt within a decade.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Weapon_System
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_loop
orionsarm.com/fm_store/OrbitalRings-I.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

asked this last repost with no reply, but what about the millions of bits of metal that would pierce holes in it every second? how could we possibly maintain it

>We can build an Orbital Ring Space Elevator today, using steel and kevlar.
We can build a launch vehicle out of paper mache and yarn... that doesn't make it sound engineering.

Steel and kevlar are cost-prohibitive and lack the yield-strength-to-weight ratio necessary to build a structure that can withstand the tidal stresses an orbital ring and space elevator would be under.

bump

>asked this last repost with no reply, but what about the millions of bits of metal that would pierce holes in it every second?

Good question, but that's not quite the reality of space debris. Most of space is utterly empty. There are not millions of bits of metal flying around space.

There are pieces of space debris. The big chunks can be taken down with laser systems very similar to what we already have in place on our ships.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_Weapon_System

Missions to space to clear out any potentially dangerous debris before/during construction of the space elevator would be able to deal with the really dangerous stuff.

>We can build a launch vehicle out of paper mache and yarn... that doesn't make it sound engineering.

If you have a specific question, that can be addressed. But simply saying "not possible, for no reason I can articulate" doesn't invalidate the proposal

>Steel and kevlar are cost-prohibitive

About $400 billion for the whole project. $50 billion if we do a launch loop first.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch_loop

>and lack the yield-strength-to-weight ratio necessary

They're plenty strong, since the tether would only go about 300 km or so.

orionsarm.com/fm_store/OrbitalRings-I.pdf

> structure that can withstand the tidal stresses an orbital ring and space elevator would be under.

Not sure what you're referring to, but Birch addresses the stresses on the structure in that article.

find a way to positively charge all debris and then negatively charge the oprbit ring (or vice versa whichever results in repulsion)

could this work? just thought it off the top of my head

I suppose. It would probably be a lot more expensive than just blowing up/diverting it, though.

no there is literally millions of pieces of space debris orbitting the earth... it's not randomly floating in space. there isn't a whole lot of 'big chunks' either lol... have they tested the lazer systems? your wiki article says the lazers have nothing to do with space junk and has only been deployed for testing purposes. sounds as retarded as the chinese net idea to be perfectly honest with you.

for clarification the debris is from us and not bits of meteor or something

>no there is literally millions of pieces of space debris orbitting the earth

Yes. And most of it would never go near the ring. And the pieces that we are concerned about could be blown up with lasers, diverted, etc.

>have they tested the lazer systems? your wiki article says the lazers have nothing to do with space junk and has only been deployed for testing purposes

Sadly I don't have access to (probably classified) information like this. But I imagine if it's on a ship right now they've done some testing on it. It's certainly easier to take down a piece of space junk than a missile coming in low where you barely have any time to react.

>About $400 billion for the whole project.
And where are you getting that bullshit number? Even at 300 km you're talking about a circle with a circumference of about 40,000 km. Even just making a single beam that long would be about $15-20 billion just for the cost of the steel. Nevermind actually launching and assembling it.


>They're plenty strong, since the tether would only go about 300 km or so.
>Building a non-geostationary structure tethered to the Earth
>Not worrying about material stress.
You're a fucking moron.

Hogwash.

>most of it
so only a few thousand pieces going a few hundred kilometres an hour every second then

everything in the op is anecdotal lol

bump for elevator user

>And where are you getting that bullshit number?

You can run the numbers yourself from Paul Birch's article. Estimate the costs of the materials, and then the cost of sending them to orbit. The launch costs are the biggest factor.

>ven just making a single beam that long would be about $15-20 billion just for the cost of the steel.

Where are you making that up from?

>You're a fucking moron.

Yeah, but this is a good idea.

Please cite your source that hundreds of thousands of pieces of space debris hit things in space. How is the international space station up right now since space causes things to immediately explode from the space bullets bombarding things?

...

You mean it hurts your brain to think. Did you bother even googling it? Or do good idea make you angry?

yeah I am sure that this would be quite a technological advance for our species...But honestly it wouldn't be up for 6 weeks before some space muslin wants to detonate it because its not been blessed with the proper halal meat or something to that effect...

TLDR DON'T BUILD A SPACE PINATA FOR ISIS

>says the guy who thinks science fiction is real

I think for space mining, we should just redirect asteroids to collide with the moon and then mine them from a lunar base. We could also weaponize the asteroids so we could easily get funding from the military industrial complex.

The ISS is in orbit along with all the debris, so the relative velocity is low.

But something sitting there in geostationary? No such luck, 12km/s relative velocity. Shredded ribbons.

Security checkpoint before anyone gets on. Otherwise, Space Muslims don't have any way to get to space.

true but my logic is that once you do it, you dont have to do it again and it keeps working without any maintentance, dont have to maintain a natural force of the universe, jsut tell it what to do and boom, does all the work for you

Yeah.

Just the equipment and fuel to redirect the mass of rock would cost more than the value of the rock.

There is simply nothing in space worth its weight in rocket fuel.

>The ISS is in orbit along with all the debris, so the relative velocity is low.

Because space is full of space debris, but it all travels in the same direction? Ok, shill.

The space age ended when we accomplished all the goals we could accomplish with space.

We could easily harvest the power of nuclear energy to achieve our goals. I don't know the exact specifics but I assume it is possible.

Yeah, that's the problem with mining right now. But if we reduce our costs by 2-3 orders of magnitude, it becomes very feasible.

Except for power for under 1c/kwh, and the hundreds of trillions of dollars in materials that can be mined.

>Because space is full of space debris, but it all travels in the same direction? Ok, shill.
Of course. Everyone launches rockets the same way because the earth rotates only one way and if you launch that way you boost your speed.

I concur. Thorium in particular could get us to at least 3c/kwh, and maybe as low as 1.5c/kwh. Not quite as good as we can do with space-based solar, but an incredibly powerful idea that we should be investing in right now.

>I don't know the exact specifics but I assume it is possible.
Thank you for saving me the trouble of proving your statement incorrect, because it 100% is incorrect.

>Yeah, that's the problem with mining right now. But if we reduce our costs by 2-3 orders of magnitude, it becomes very feasible.
Yes everything is simple when you are steeped in ignorance.

How do you transmit the power without losing the vast majority of the energy?

All of the materials need to be brought down, and that energy is more costly than the materials themselves, so it's kind of pointless from an economic standpoint.

Exactly and since these asteroids are in space and would only come to the moon for mining, we shouldn't have to worry about containing the radiation plus we could utilize robots which would allow us to save even more money but cutting the safety budget and life support systems.

Thorium's decay products have half-lives of 14 billion years and they're far more radiotoxic than uranium.

What percentage of the global power demand will nuclear fill. It currently fills 10%. What is your fiscal plan to make up the remaining 90%, and keep up with grown, seeing how oil is finite?

>Thank you for saving me the trouble of proving your statement incorrect, because it 100% is incorrect.

Lol, you're an oil company shill. Fuck off Exxon Mobil.

>How do you transmit the power without losing the vast majority of the energy?

Down a wire, Exxon Mobil.

>All of the materials need to be brought down, and that energy is more costly than the materials themselves

Lol, bringing things down to earth costs more than the materials themselves, even with gravity, Exxon Mobil.

Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean you have to be a condescending asshole buddy.

It takes energy to change an orbit like that. A lot of energy, and it scales with the mass of whatever you want to bring down.

You'd need new physics to bring things down from space at a profit. New physics is a polite way of saying it's impossible.

You've really got nothing better to do than troll in slide threads?

You respect people talking about being able to do shit that they cannot? You respect this last post of his?

>Thorium's decay products have half-lives of 14 billion years and they're far more radiotoxic than uranium.

Lol, Thorium barely emits any decay products. That's why its so much safer to use as a fuel, unless it's been hit with neutrons, it's barely dangerous at all.

>What percentage of the global power demand will nuclear fill.

100,000% of current use it's entirely feasible, Exxon Mobil.

>What is your fiscal plan to make up the remaining 90%

Build a bunch of reactors, sell the power, and make so much money you could probably eliminate taxes pretty soon.

You lost the argument when you stopped even trying to be a troll.

You're just being a shitty kid now.

>It takes energy to change an orbit like that.

Really, how much energy does it take to go down a space elevator? Funny how you can't ever cite any facts for your arguments, Exxon Mobil.

>You'd need new physics to bring things down from space at a profit.

Lol.

>New physics is a polite way of saying it's impossible.

"I don't know anything about science, and Exxon Mobil is paying me $7 an hour to pretend"

There are people who still fall this globe-deception in 2k17?
I mean you have to be blind AND deaf to be this fucking gullible.

god's work

we hopefully /deepspacemining/ and /cosmonauts/ soon

You can simply allow things to occur on a much larger time scale. Perhaps collide asteroids together and try to redirect the debris or redirect the orbit to slingshot around Jupiter and head towards mars would be the first baby step I would say. Of course all this is occurring on a decade timescale, maybe even a century timescale.

"I don't know science! Must call the other people shills, to hide the fact that I am a shill."

>There are people who still fall this globe-deception in 2k17?

Did Royal Dutch Shell decide to join Exxon Mobil in the shillfest?

Come up with a single argument even remotely based on science and maybe someone will take you seriously.

>cut peoples taxes
the idea is to milk the gentiles not help filthy goyim cattle!!!

>god's work

Quite literally. Energy would become so cheap we can desalinate water and end deaths from thirst/dirty water.

Precisely. Space Elevator would end the cabal (it's actually an Anglo-American banking cartle, not just Jews, but whatever).

Prove to me the earth is round and we're talking. As long as you are incapable of doing that, you deserve to be called gullible

Pythagoras. Now they've got Langley in here. We've got Big Oil and the fuckwits from Langley.

What does this tell everyone about the threat that a Space Elevator must pose to the cabal?

I appreciate what you are doing user, I really do, but telling some autismo faggots on a board made for politics is not the way to do it.

Perhaps you could go to a chat forum specifically made for discussion of anything related to space?

Dude what the fuck is actually going on with you.
Youve been spamming this shit for months.
Midlife crisis or something?

Pythagoras knew the earth was flat you retarded atheist. I don't mind you throwing your money at (((NASA))) but you better stay out of my pockets commie. Space elevator hahahaha are you even old enough to post on this site?

>but telling some autismo faggots on a board made for politics is not the way to do it.

Meme Magic is the ONLY WAY TO DO IT!

>Midlife crisis or something?

Yeah. This is the greatest thing since sliced bread. You getting on the Space Elevator?

We can't actually build a space elevator with steel and kevlar. The steel cabels in the tallest buildings are near the limit of vertical cable length. You would need materials like carbon nanotubes which for now we are only able to produce in microscopic sizes.

>Pythagoras knew the earth was flat you retarded atheist

Says the guy posting from Royal Dutch Shell's corporate headquarters without even hiding his IP address.

Things we've known for thousands of years are actually made up, even though you can verify them personally.

>I don't mind you throwing your money at (((NASA))) but you better stay out of my pockets commie.

I'm advocating an end to taxation entirely. Commie.

>tena of trillions worth of material
Our current Jewish run banking system isn't ready for that. We need to gas the kikes before we can have a space elevator. Priorities man

>We can't actually build a space elevator with steel and kevlar. The steel cabels in the tallest buildings are near the limit of vertical cable length.

Assuming for now that you're being honest, we can build tethers that are long enough out of steel and kevlar. We can build building much taller than we currently have, probably 20 miles or so if tapered. The only issue is having the ground support the weight.

>Our current Jewish run banking system isn't ready for that.

It's the British more than the Jews. Who created Israel?

Anyways, how better to get rid of the banking cabal (or the Jews, if you prefer that term) than to let the normies know how they've been robbed of a standard of living 10x higher than their current one?

What a remarkably stupid idea

Better than the Big Oil shills (who got buttfucked with science and haven't come back).

Nothing wrong with an interesting idea simply because another idea might be better.

>27 posts by this id
>zero proof of a globe earth

Do you now understand why nobody takes you serious?

>I'm advocating an end to taxation entirely

Hahahahaha what? Then how will your jewy friends at nasa get their shekels? How are you planning to build a trillion dollar space elevator, crowfunding?

Don't reply to them. This is a slide thread.

>Do you now understand why nobody takes you serious?

I've also failed to demonstrate why witch burning would not solve all of our problems, Royal Dutch Shell.

You still haven't managed to make a single scientific coherent, much less verifiable, statement, Exxon Mobil.