Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!throopw
From: throopw@xyzzy.UUCP (Wayne A. Throop)
Newsgroups: sci.misc
Subject: Re: efficiency / greenhouse effect / solar power satellites
Message-ID: <774@xyzzy.UUCP>
Date: 13 Apr 88 18:55:57 GMT
References: <789@spdcc.COM> <758@xyzzy.UUCP> <806@spdcc.COM>
Organization: Data General, RTP NC.
Lines: 25

> eli@spdcc.COM (Steve Elias)
> 	     i understand that even hundreds of times present needs would not
> 	     be more than a few percent of solar flux.

Not quite.  Even from 1 to 10 thousand (not hundred) times our present
needs is only one percent of the solar flux.

> 	     humankind has got to learn to leave less of a footprint on the
> 	     planet,

SPS seems a delightful way to do this, since the investment in them need
not be wasted as industrial capacity is moved towards space.  That is,
if thermal effects dictate moving some of our industrial capacity,
simply point the SPS at the new location, or move the industry onto the
satellite.  Any capacity built on the ground would be much harder to
retarget.

--
A is for Atom.  They are all so small,
That we have not really seen any at all.

B is for Bomb.  They are much bigger.
So, mister, you better keep off of the trigger.
                        --- Edward Teller
-- 
Wayne Throop      <the-known-world>!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!throopw