Jedi Council Forums - Nuclear Power In Space

Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » The Senate Floor »

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Nuclear Power In Space
Miin_Bodenna Registered: Feb '02	Date Posted: 7/29/02 6:10pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	Thanks for the clarification...i was trying to read the forum...but i regularly day dream while reading and forget what i read. -----signature----- Proof that girls are evil... Girls = Time Time = Money Money = Evil Therefore Girls are evil :P
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Kimball_Kinnison Registered: Oct '01	Date Posted: 7/29/02 6:20pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	The Andes mts. would be a good place to put it, and it would help the SA economy. It would be a big engineering feet, but no bigger than the great wall of China or the Pyramids. Africa has a few possible sites as well. In The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, colonists on the moon used the catapult to launch grain (and later rocks) to earth. It played a vital part in the moon's fight for independence. There are a few disadvantages, though. You would need to make it about 40 miles long to provide a gentle enough acceleration for humans to tolerate (with a reasonable power/thrust ratio). If you make it too powerful, you would crush anyone who tried to ride it. During a launch, it would also unleash a large compression wave (of air) much like a sonic boom. Kimball Kinnison -----signature----- You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
VadersLaMent Registered: Apr '02	Date Posted: 7/29/02 6:27pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space - Date Edited: 7/29/02 6:38pm (1 edits total) Edited By: VadersLaMent
	I briefly mentioned it above, but yes a multi gigawatt laser would help alot. Go to Mercury and use the materials there to build large solar collectors in orbit. These then turn that energy to laser light to be beamed to a focus which can then shine a laser on a plasma gas filled mag field. You will hear much more about light sails rather than mag fields because there are decades of research behind solar and laser light sails and only about a decade of mag field research for space propulsion. As far as space colonies hooked up to a space drive, you will need multiple hydroponics gardens, power plants with multiple backups, materials to totally replace your drive if needed, and people would need to keep their egoes in check. There is a system called rapid prototyping that can create any mechanical part you could ever want by shooting a laser into a resin to form the item kept in computer memory. This is a "primitive" form a nanotech of fabricating anything you need to. it would be advatageous to create your colony out of asteroidal material and leave a large portion in its raw form so you have materials to work with if needed. Once again any search engine with "The High Frontier" or "space colonies" should yield lots of results. -----signature----- Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic--Arthur C. Clarke Any sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial intelligence is indistinguishable from God--Michael Shermer I am a sexy, shoeless GOD OF WAR!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Herman Snerd Registered: Oct '99	Date Posted: 7/29/02 8:56pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	Dang, there's been a lot of cool stuff posted since I was last here. -----signature----- Voted Dork Magazine's "Sexiest Nerd Alive" for 2008 http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb237/Snerdmania/DSCF0113.jpg
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
SirLancelot Registered: Jun '02	Date Posted: 7/29/02 9:04pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	The great thing about nuke plants, they are the cleanest, most efficent, and powerful form of power yet created. why it isent our primary source of power is a complete mystery to me. when we go to space we will need nuclear power. if we where to set up large bases on the moon, one primary nuke planet would be our best option. -----signature----- "I love the smell of napalm in the morning....It smells like VICTORY!" "Who would mug two black men holding guns and sitting in a car thats worht less then your shirt?" "Bullet - Tooth Tony and his friend Desert Eagel .50"
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
VadersLaMent Registered: Apr '02	Date Posted: 7/30/02 7:46am Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	In brief: A new reactor called the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor or PBMR is graphite encased uranium fuel pellets the size of billiard balls using helium instead of water for cooling. Originally touted as meltdown proof(and still is by some) there are of course dangers with any nuclear plant. Small power plants that produce 100 megawatts are planned, which is one tenth the conventional plant output, but they are smaller, cheaper, and could be built easier and faster. -----signature----- Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic--Arthur C. Clarke Any sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial intelligence is indistinguishable from God--Michael Shermer I am a sexy, shoeless GOD OF WAR!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Ramius Registered: Jun '02	Date Posted: 7/30/02 7:01pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	Has anyone looked at the last link on the first page? I find it to be a very interesting idea. Basically, they want to use the shuttles' big fuel tank, and put them into orbit to use as space stations. Here's a quote from the website: The numbers are startling. If the Space Island Group could launch (20) slightly modified External Fuel Tanks and deliver them to orbit for between $100 to $125 million per tank and to modify on orbit would add between $50 to $75 million per tank. The average cost of a (7) Geode Zero-Gravity Station would be approximately $1 to $1.4 billion each and the cost of one (14) Geode Partial Gravity Ring Station will be about $2.1 to $2.8 billion. Each of the tanks would have approximately 100,000 cubic feet of interior space. Of that approximately 1/3 of each tank would be used for life support, command and control and other maintenance activities leaving about 66,000 cubic feet of usable space. On the typical (7) Geode Zero-Gravity Station approximately 462,000 cubic feet will be available for lease. We estimate that we will begin by charging $20 per cubic foot per day and on the Zero-Gravity Stations with revenues generated each year in excess of $3.4 billion. We estimate that the cost of building each of the stations will be paid off within (3) years from the beginning of the station's operation. They also plan on a second generation shuttle. I think it is a good plan, but I find the $20 per cubic foot a day rather expensive. Who would be able to pay that much? That's also another thing to consider: The prices that they estimate to build the station might be a little low to make their idea seem more feasible. -----signature----- And shepherds we shall be, for thee my Lord for thee, Power hath descended forth from thy hand, that our feet may swiftly carry out thy command, We shall flow a river forth to thee, And teeming with souls shall it ever be.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
VadersLaMent Registered: Apr '02	Date Posted: 7/30/02 7:13pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	Anything concerning getting something to space is going to be expensive until it becomes frequent and routine. The more often a company buys the fuel, the lower the price will go. A single stage to orbit vehicle can pull launch costs down from the Space Shuttle's $10,000 per pound to $1,000 per pound. That can be reduced further the more often it is used. A beanstalk, skyhook, or a rail launched sytem as mentioned above could possibly get the cost down to an airline ticket per passenger! We have a way to go yet. -----signature----- Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic--Arthur C. Clarke Any sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial intelligence is indistinguishable from God--Michael Shermer I am a sexy, shoeless GOD OF WAR!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
SirLancelot Registered: Jun '02	Date Posted: 7/31/02 11:19am Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	i always like the VentureStar. it was a reusable ship that can carry a payload equal to an 18-wheeler. it was cheep because it used hydrogen fuel. it was small so it required a small platform to launch and land, and it was simple to tunraround. the space shuttle was supposed to have a turnaround of a feew weeks, now it is a few months. it requires a specialized platform, and a massive support crew. we could have saved billions of dollers had we found a more effective design. -----signature----- "I love the smell of napalm in the morning....It smells like VICTORY!" "Who would mug two black men holding guns and sitting in a car thats worht less then your shirt?" "Bullet - Tooth Tony and his friend Desert Eagel .50"
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ShaneP Registered: Mar '01	Date Posted: 7/31/02 12:17pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	No we musn't use nuclear power in space. Space is clean and it shouldn't be polluted, especially with radiation. -----signature----- It was as if a million middle-aged virgins just farted with rage and were suddenly silenced.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
VadersLaMent Registered: Apr '02	Date Posted: 7/31/02 12:35pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space - Date Edited: 7/31/02 12:40pm (1 edits total) Edited By: VadersLaMent
	Space is not "clean". There is more radiation zipping through space than you can imagine. Using a nuclear rocket in space islike pouring a shot of water in the ocean. There is a way around it all of course. If nanotechnolgy can be fully relized the weight of space vehicles can be reduced by 90%! Right now if you want to make a single stage to orbit vehicle like the VentureStar, 90% of the weight on the launch pad is FUEL. Decreasing the weight of the launch vehicle by a factor of ten would make launching single stage to orbit vehicles SUPER cheap and carry very large paylods to orbit. With such a weight reduction nuclear power would not be needed to get around in the solar system. Although, no matter what the weight of the vehicle, nuclear power still provide faster speads than conventional chemical rockets. Edited for spelling. -----signature----- Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic--Arthur C. Clarke Any sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial intelligence is indistinguishable from God--Michael Shermer I am a sexy, shoeless GOD OF WAR!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Ramius Registered: Jun '02	Date Posted: 7/31/02 12:40pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	Space is clean and it shouldn't be polluted, especially with radiation Are you kidding? Space is already filled with radiation. It's natural. Space Radiation Here's a quote from that article: The 30 or so astronauts that NASA plans to send to space this year for construction of the International Space Station may face deadly doses of solar radiation when a period of intense space weather peaks in the coming months If you were to travel outside the earth's magnetosphere, which protects against most radiation, the rad. levels would skyrocket. Even Jupiter emmits deadly amounts of radiation. So if an accident happened in space with nuclear material, it would have no effect. -----signature----- And shepherds we shall be, for thee my Lord for thee, Power hath descended forth from thy hand, that our feet may swiftly carry out thy command, We shall flow a river forth to thee, And teeming with souls shall it ever be.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ShaneP Registered: Mar '01	Date Posted: 7/31/02 12:55pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space
	You guys are kidding right? Yeah right, next thing you'll tell me space is cold. The sun keeps it plenty warm. -----signature----- It was as if a million middle-aged virgins just farted with rage and were suddenly silenced.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
VadersLaMent Registered: Apr '02	Date Posted: 7/31/02 1:06pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space - Date Edited: 7/31/02 1:25pm (1 edits total) Edited By: VadersLaMent
	I can't tell if your trolling or if you honestly don't know. Either way its its kinda rude. BTW, if you were is space without a suit on the side facing the sun would burn to a crisp while the side facing away would feeze solid. Our atmosphere here on Earth keeps this from happening. EDIT:otherwise I am enjoying this topic alot, right along with the "Big bang vs Ceationism" thread. -----signature----- Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic--Arthur C. Clarke Any sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial intelligence is indistinguishable from God--Michael Shermer I am a sexy, shoeless GOD OF WAR!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
ShaneP Registered: Mar '01	Date Posted: 7/31/02 1:59pm Subject: RE: Nuclear Power In Space - Date Edited: 7/31/02 2:03pm (1 edits total) Edited By: ShaneP
	Don't get bent out of shape LaMent. What's the topic? How did I waver from it? ShaneP President, The Flat-Earth Society. Edit: Nuclear "fission" is one way to explore the cosmos;unfortunately, fission reactors are still theory. -----signature----- It was as if a million middle-aged virgins just farted with rage and were suddenly silenced.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 - Previous | Next | Reload

Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » The Senate Floor »