I knew as soon as I saw "moon" in the URL. I will confess I've forgotten why you have the despair reaction to He3, but I know well that you do.
On the broader issue, can it *possibly* be energy-effective to ship petroleum an average of 9 AU from Titan to Earth orbit? The difference in orbital velocities is 20km/s, and that rotational energy has to come from somewhere.
Ah, unless I've dropped a 0 somewhere, I think it can't be. Gasoline has an energy content of 44 Mj/kg, and the difference in kinetic energy is ~400 Mj/kg (1 kg x (20,000 m/s)^2).
Has anyone seriously (for questionable values of the term) looked into the idea of converting the fuel to energy onsite and then pulsing it towards receivers in Earth orbit? (distances and dissipation ratios be damned!)
I think I'll just reread "We Open on Venus". I forget the author's name but the setting was a theater troupe landing on a planet with massive hydrocarbon resources (as in "seas of gasoline").
I believe the anti-smoking ordinances involved the death penalty...
no subject
whats up?
no subject
On the broader issue, can it *possibly* be energy-effective to ship petroleum an average of 9 AU from Titan to Earth orbit? The difference in orbital velocities is 20km/s, and that rotational energy has to come from somewhere.
Ah, unless I've dropped a 0 somewhere, I think it can't be. Gasoline has an energy content of 44 Mj/kg, and the difference in kinetic energy is ~400 Mj/kg (1 kg x (20,000 m/s)^2).
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
I want to complain about the blinking
(Anonymous) - 2010-07-07 05:41 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Has anyone seriously (for questionable values of the term) looked into the idea of converting the fuel to energy onsite and then pulsing it towards receivers in Earth orbit? (distances and dissipation ratios be damned!)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Why so serious?
Re: Why so serious?
Re: Why so serious?
Re: Why so serious?
Re: Why so serious?
Re: Why so serious?
(Anonymous) - 2010-07-06 02:55 (UTC) - ExpandRe: Why so serious?
Re: Why so serious?
Re: Why so serious?
Re: Why so serious?
no subject
no subject
ONLY YOU CAN SAVE US, NICOL JAMES!
no subject
I believe the anti-smoking ordinances involved the death penalty...
(no subject)
no subject
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2010-07-06 02:44 (UTC) - Expandno subject
no subject
(no subject)