271 comments on Solar Satellite Power with Laser Propulsion and Reusable Launch Vehicle
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
271 comments on Solar Satellite Power with Laser Propulsion and Reusable Launch Vehicle
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so.”
—Mark Twain
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
Energy is not the only cause of war or scarce resource in the world. What about ideology - the cause of most wars?
The threat of war will never be eliminated. The only way the threat can be reduced is to have diversity in power sources. If a single madman can wipe out the world then it would have been done many times already. The reason it has not occurred is that we have had diverse ideologies and power sources. Making people dependent on a single kill switch solution (such as your satellites) renders everyone easily vulnerable to such a madman scenario.
"Energy is not the only cause of war or scarce resource in the world. What about ideology (cause of most wars)"
I make the case in "Evolutionary Psychology, Memes and the Origin of War" that ideology is the result of anticipated resource shortages rather than a cause.
"and access to metals?"
With loads of energy you can make metals out of country rock.
North Korea (if it wished) has the same access to scarce resources (including energy) as South Korea. Ideology is the only difference between North and South. Extremist ideology has minimal relationship to energy resources. North Korea could easily wipe out your suggested satellite system many times over with their existing technology.
Assuming they could (a stretch) and they wiped out a Chinese power sat, how long do you think they would last?
The Chinese would be in cahoots and would have the North Koreans knock out US and European satellites on their behalf. Proxy wars are old.
I suppose that's possible. Remind me to have my power sat insured by a Chinese company.
If you want diversity of power sources, which I agree with, then introducing SSP is certainly a good thing. SSP certainly has no single "kill switch". For starters the rectenna on the ground is owned and defended by the local utility and nation receiving the power. The satellite in space would be defended even better by various national military, even better than the growing fleet of communications and other satellites. The increased defense of national and global interests in near space is necessary as our global economic infrastructure increases its presence in cis-lunar space. We must reduce our environmental footprint on earth. I don't think you understand how difficult it would be to "kill" an SSP. It would be sort of like attempting to destroy the interstate highway system with a bomb placed anywhere you like. We may have difficulty preventing that bomb, but violators will be swiftly located and introduced to corrective measures. Everyone that has reliable electric power wants to see their electric power continue.
What about ideology - the cause of most wars?
Are you sure that Ideology is not being used to 'sell' the war VS being the cause?