Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...

« Back

93 days, 5 hours, 53 minutes ago
View gnerphk's profile
gnerphk
Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Anyone else see this? I'm very excited!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl6jn-DdafM
93 days, 5 hours, 28 minutes ago
Profile Image
talespin
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Yeah, that's definitely an exciting video. Shows some practical and feasible thinking. Thanks for sharing!
93 days, 3 hours, 26 minutes ago
Profile Image
zanero
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
The SLS from the video sorta reminded me of a Cobol... (and I now am wondering if I played too many turns lately...)
93 days, 1 hours, 23 minutes ago
Profile Image
tenelid
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
had not seen it yet, very exciting news!
92 days, 17 hours, 15 minutes ago
View tom graves's profile
tom graves
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
We are going. To stay.
92 days, 17 hours, 7 minutes ago
Profile Image
rexe
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
A new age -- Space is cool again.

Is anybody else going to the Falcon Heavy launch next month? Maybe we could have the planets con there.
92 days, 15 hours, 12 minutes ago
Profile Image
renathras
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
This stuff all is pretty cool, just wish it was more accessible already. Either on the R&D side or the doing side. I hate just watching other people do all the cool stuff. :)

Where's the Falcon Heavy launching at? Arizona?
92 days, 15 hours, 0 minutes ago
View whisperer's profile
whisperer
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
> Where's the Falcon Heavy launching at? Arizona?

Kennedy Space Center in Florida is where they normally launch. It's not like those pads are in high demand :(
92 days, 14 hours, 13 minutes ago
Profile Image
domodedovo
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Nice startup fundraiser video. Didn't know that this Nasa company now is also into spaceflight business.
92 days, 4 hours, 54 minutes ago
Profile Image
glynsalternate
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Awesome... William Shatner still gets work!
_ _ _

I fell down the YouTube video recommendations rabbit hole months ago regarding all the private companies making parts for rockets. The 3D metal printing technology is a serious game changer. Dramatically cuts down on the number of parts required and allows much smaller producers into the market since instead having to have an entire factory full of machines for tooling, you just need a few 6-axis robotic arms to print and then CNC the parts.

I'm kinda sad the carbon fiber route turned out to be a bad idea (I worked with and distribute it), as Elon Musk learned the hard way and switched to stainless steel himself.

Found a video on it, not the one I saw, but here it is anyhow; https://youtu.be/LogE40_wR9k
92 days, 4 hours, 30 minutes ago
Profile Image
rexe
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Love the Relativity Aeon engine ... 3D printed and ~100 parts. The Rutherford and SuperDraco are also pretty cutting edge.

And the BE-7 plans to land things on the moon.

But the raptor plans to take to the sky in the next two weeks -- and that engine is the workhorse of the future.
91 days, 17 hours, 9 minutes ago
Profile Image
alejop
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
They plan to build Gateway! Is Frederik Phol being honored? :)
91 days, 16 hours, 29 minutes ago
Profile Image
procrustes
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
I guess I get intoxicated by this as many others. Too bad the biggest challenge facing the human race is our nationalistic jingoism. The scientific resolution is useless without a commensurate global political will and ffs at least a joint recognition of global warming and an agreement/acceptance of a global approach. Because I anticipate at least 8bn people aren't going to be able to get on those spaceships. Discuss.
91 days, 12 hours, 51 minutes ago
Profile Image
rexe
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
SpaceX raptor engine serial #5 is almost complete. They are ramping to a target production of one raptor engine every 3 days by the summer. Is it even a tech1 engine?

Beach closure in Boca Chica May 28-May 30 for starhopper tests with the raptor.

Super Heavy construction (formerly known as the Big F**lcon Rocket) begins in 3 months. Does it qualify as a small deep-space freighter?

Starlink launches tonight.

We might start moving humanoids off the Federation homeworld before overpopulation and we start eating supplies. We just need to build this damn starbase!! We can build some terraforming ships after we get the starbase built.
91 days, 12 hours, 37 minutes ago
Profile Image
glynsalternate
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Procrustes: Take some Earth Science courses... you'll realize you've been lied to.

Even if humanity never existed, the planet's climate would still be moving towards warming. Only half of the forcing is due to mankind currently, the other half is just natural forcing which we cannot easily affect. We cannot stop climate change by ceasing all greenhouse emissions... especially since natural forcing is about to skyrocket as the permafrost defrosts releasing more methane and not all of the human caused forcing is even related to greenhouse gases.

Ocean/lake acidification is why CO2 emissions are a problem because it affects current biodiversity negatively. The best solution is to sequester CO2 since reducing emissions is asking the poor of the world to stay poor.

Things like solar panels actually make things worse, more energy goes into making the glass for them than they will ever produce. In China they literally build coal plants to solely power a solar panel factory.

Wind turbines don't have to result in drying out the soil and killing birds, but currently the design in use do exactly that... also they don't last all that long which is why so many wind farms have been dismantled... too many moving parts.

Nuclear power is the best way to reduce our emissions.

Otherwise it's just technology that will help reduce emissions... and kneecapping first world nations is not going to increase technological innovations.

Stupid people have ruined environmentalism and media... they need to stop being emotional and educate themselves.
91 days, 12 hours, 33 minutes ago
Profile Image
glynsalternate
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
The best solution to control climate change... is launching things into space to reflect EMR away from Earth (or collect it like in SimCity2000).
91 days, 12 hours, 22 minutes ago
Profile Image
rexe
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
It takes more energy to launch things from earth into low-earth-orbit than it takes to launch the same thing into low-earth-orbit from the moon. Gravity and atmosphere are a double-edged sword.

That's why we are going -- to the moon -- to stay. We shall plunder the moon for its resources -- just like a debris disc.
91 days, 11 hours, 56 minutes ago
Profile Image
procrustes
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Glynsalternate

Talk about climbing a soapbox. But dont address such insulting and pompous shite at me because I said none of that. Just read the point ffs. Take a reading and comprehension course.

I did not say that humanity was the cause. You do however agree there is a warming which is part of my comment. I neither stated the cause nor suggested we have solar panels. The issues raised were; there is no agreement there is warming, there is no agreement on a resolution or amelioration, and the major point, there will be no agreement on this (and implied on any global issue) because of nationalist blinkers, and we wont all get on a spaceship (if you do send me text).

However your comment "it's just technology" does sound a little obtuse, if not narrow minded, and of course, you must be a citizen of a first world nation. Good for you. No contribution to, or responsibility for, the problem from there at all.
91 days, 11 hours, 49 minutes ago
Profile Image
martinr
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Glyn how old is you information on solar panels? As recent news articles debunk what you say.

Its not that is changing, its the rate of change. Things are changing fast and nature cannot keep up. And when nature cannot keep up you get mass extinctions. One time it was a meteor hit. Maybe the industrial revolution will do it a bit slower?

Flora and fauna take time to adapt.

In the North sea near where I live we have mass fish changes. Seas are getting warmer. Fish like certain temperature ranges. If it gets too warm they move to colder area's. If their food source does not change as fast they starve. If the sea floor depth where they move to is not right for them to the way they feed then they starve.

What we fish around the North sea will change as fish from warmer areas move further north.

But if their food source does not move as fast they may not do as well etc.

So the old fish are pushed into a new area and don't do well so have to adapt. The replacing fish don't do as well as they are getting used to the area so they don't do as well as the previous fish, but they like the increasing temperature.

Whole eco systems break down.

We are getting more warm water sharks moving up the coast.

Krill which are a major food source for other creatures like cold water so they are moving closer to the poles. More and more creatures have to move to get to them but are moving further from their hunting grounds what they were used to. Will it soon get too warm for the krill and the whole sea food chain will collapse?

One chain breaks as it cannot adapt as fast due to fast change. This wipes out another chain. Things don't recover as fast and the whole food chain collapses. So us humans fish a different species which is over fished as we need to eat fish and that collapses.

Its all about reducing pollution overall. As if we said you can do anything to the planet then we would all be dead.

NOX gasses, particulates, CO2, plastics, pollutants in all the third world countries as its cheap to pollute as you don't need to clean it up.

Recently China is making fluorocarbons again that eat Ozone and allow UV light through. The holes over the poles was getting better until Satellites noticed the gases are coming from the Chinese insulation markets. So skin cancers in parts of the world go up as the pollutant is cheap.

We recently went a whole week without using coal (it may be longer than that but it happened a while back). Coal power is the worst pollutant. So we managed to push coal powered stations to back up stations and due to warmer weather we did not need them.

But then I think we are shipping wood chips from all over the world to burn to make power. Which is mad as we need to plant trees so they grow. And not plant them to burn in a 20 years etc.

Its a big problem as the human race is a big problem.






91 days, 11 hours, 33 minutes ago
Profile Image
renathras
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@procrustes - I think the problem is you blamed nationalism, and stated there is no global political will. @Glyn pointed out that the problem is that there can be no recognized solution as long as the proposed "solutions" are ones that do not work. The reason that "there is no agreement on a resolution or amelioration" is because much of the argument that there's A PROBLEM is based on politics, propaganda, and emotive appeal, not underlying science.

The underlying science isn't even certain that it IS a problem, nor that Humans are the bulk cause of it. Imagine for a moment if we submit - for the sake of argument - that it is a problem. That's only step one. Now we have to look at step to: Solutions depend on the CAUSE of the problem.

So if the cause is 100% Human activity, that leads to very different solutions than if it is 100% natural causes, or if it is 50/50.

The "commensurate global political will" being stymied by "nationalistic jingoism" (So. Many. Propaganda. Buzzwords! - typically, used by people without a good argument...) is dead set on the 100% Human cause, and thus their proposed solutions are based on trying to address that 100% Human cause.

...but if the cause is 50/50, their solutions are WRONG. It's not even a case that they'd be "half right", as the systems are very complex, meaning if you're not right, you could be inadvertently making things worse. So a "well, at least it'd address half the issue, right?" is not a functional solution in this case.

The political, emotive appeal will is to basically force developed countries into a developing country state, and then demand that all nations cut back, which would make a modern standard of living impossible. If we all lived as stone age tribes, that's "sustainable", but there is no major democratic (or even non-democratic) will anywhere in the world to do so. So the global warming alarmists use propaganda to promise some kind of perfect, clean future where the Federation has no money and no pollution, while also being far more advanced with higher HDI and amenities than we have today.

It's an absurd proposition, and one which has (as a testament to its absurdity) failed entirely.

It could be done with some modifications, but climate alarmists reject those modifications - for example, nuclear power has proven to be safe and clean when managed correctly, yet climate alarmists reject nuclear, even though that's the only realistic way for our modern societies with our present level of technological development to truly curb our carbon emissions - which they cite as our main offense to "nature".

...the reality, as @Glyn said, is more complex, but even their own narrative they reject the most obvious solution to. Because their goal isn't REALLY fixing an identified problem. It's using vague terms and scare tactics to direct money and power.
91 days, 10 hours, 43 minutes ago
Profile Image
procrustes
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Lol
@Renathras If the problem is that I blamed nationalism, I didnt. I did state that there is no political will. Glyn may have stated that proposed solutions do not work, which is nothing to do with my point, but he chose to do it in an insulting and arbitrary fashion.

"So if the cause is 100% Human activity, that leads to very different solutions than if it is 100% natural causes, or if it is 50/50." - that does not follow and is unsound without you providing evidence that this is so.

In fact I was going to look at your other points but they are just trite. "stone age tribes" - who has argued for this. Presumably you can cite a source. Its just emotive claptrap. You criticised me for propaganda! You've just used vague terms and scare tactics as an argument.

Nuclear power will probably be necessary and no-one has a right to be concerned because there have never been any accidents and and we all know where the waste is (and nowhere near the groundwater) and we would want everyone to use it because it does not provide anything you can make a bomb out of, but lets keep it in the "1st world" anyway, so what does everyone else use.

if you want to play at arguments, instead of criticising my terminology, actually refute the statements I made; is there or is there not nationalistic jingoism. Perhaps you can enlighten me on the globally accepted proposed solutions.

To be honest your condescension to anyone with a different point of view proves my point. QED I guess.

Whatever the issue, whatever the reason, whatever the uncertainty there will never be a coordinated purpose to resolve it.


91 days, 8 hours, 6 minutes ago
View gnerphk's profile
gnerphk
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Frankly, I think this is a topic worthy of its own thread. It doesn't belong beneath that delightful announcement.
-----

However, I might just observe: @Procrustes -- Yes, it was condescension. Curiously, so was your response -- and so is this, just a little. There's a self-righteousness that associates itself with knowledge, and a condescending tone is often a noticeable side effect. It's more common when someone's far from expert on the topic at hand -- though as far as I can tell that's only because there are so very few genuine experts on any one topic, and my experience of them is that they rather resent being forced to discuss work in a place where they're pursuing a leisure activity.

It's unfortunate yet unavoidable that this tone, even when read, places the unthinking reader on the defensive. He has an unconscious desire to prove the other party wrong simply because, at least for the moment, he dislikes him; his pride is wounded. As a result, many a potentially fruitful discussion ends with no one learning anything.

Instead, it's often more effective to adopt a positive tone in the discussion. For example, one might add a link to an informative article on the subject to demonstrate the point, thus:
https://www.powerelectronics.com/alternative-energy/true-cost-solar-energy

(It's soft journalism, but then I'm not sufficiently invested in the topic to do yet more research today. I'm demonstrating a point by enclosing a sample link, and this one serves perfectly.)

The other side effect is that self-righteousness prohibits the speaker/writer from learning too. This is particularly unpleasant because it's so common among the ignorant, who could best use the lesson.

If I sound snarky, it's because right now I'm writing persuasively for a living and I'd much rather be doing almost anything else. But this argument invaded my relaxation. Lest you feel unfairly singled out, be assured: I'd mention @Glyn too except I know he'll read this and understand what I'm saying.
91 days, 6 hours, 0 minutes ago
Profile Image
renathras
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Procrustes - what? I wasn't being condescending at all. Please, show me the condescension. I made an argument you didn't like, but I didn't attack you as a person, speak down to you as if you know nothing, and instead used full sentences and complete ideas - which you promptly called "claptrap".

You obviously didn't even read my post. For example, you wrote/typed:

"In fact I was going to look at your other points but they are just trite. "stone age tribes" - who has argued for this."

...had you read my post, though...

"The political, emotive appeal will is to basically force developed countries into a developing country state, and then demand that all nations cut back, which would make a modern standard of living impossible. If we all lived as stone age tribes, that's "sustainable", but there is no major democratic (or even non-democratic) will anywhere in the world to do so. So the global warming alarmists use propaganda to promise some kind of perfect, clean future where the Federation has no money and no pollution, while also being far more advanced with higher HDI and amenities than we have today."

I can understand this is a little dense, so I'll spell it out more clearly: The climate change alarmists are intentionally and explicitly NOT arguing for this, because the know that they would instantly lose almost all their support.

I wasn't saying people WERE arguing for it, I was saying that they AREN'T arguing for it, because it is highly politically unpopular!

.

"if you want to play at arguments, instead of criticising my terminology, actually refute the statements I made"

I directly did - there is no "global" political will for your favored climate change "solutions" because there isn't even agreement on the scope and scale of the problem, much less what is the right solution to it.

You're assuming that everyone already agrees with your premise, but they don't want to agree with your solution because "mah nationalism!", when the reality is, many people don't even agree with your premise. Even science does not fully embrace the premise that climate change is a doomsday clock, or even a major threat to life on this planet. Indeed, the very SCIENCE of evolution would imply that it is not, as does the geological record, which shows that we're at a middling temperature in Earth's history, and that the Earth seems to have restoration mechanisms when it gets to the hot and cold extremes (which scientists still don't understand.)

.

Condescension, btw, definition (per google, Mariam-Webster, etc):

" condescend

intransitive verb
To do something that one regards as beneath one's social rank or dignity; lower oneself. synonym: stoop.
intransitive verb
To behave in a patronizing or superior manner toward someone.
To descend from the superior position, rank, or dignity proper or usually accorded to one; voluntarily waive ceremony and assume equality with an inferior; be complaisant, yielding, or consenting in dealings with inferiors; deign."

...I did none of that. I didn't "lower myself", because I don't believe myself to be higher than you. If I did, I wouldn't have typed all that out trying to explain to you why your position is incorrect. My post was an appeal to reason, which I assumed that you had. That isn't something I would do if I thought myself your better or superior, nor were my sentences worded as one talking to a child.

I'm not sure why you chose an attack on me rather than a defense of your positions or an attack on my arguments. My guess would be that you don't have a functional defense/attack, but maybe it's just you're used to arguing with morons and not used to someone who can put up a fight, intellectually speaking?

But dismissing a post you obviously didn't read (and you even implied you didn't) as "claptrap" is, somehow, the position of a person with an intellectual and rational position (you)? I think not...
91 days, 5 hours, 56 minutes ago
Profile Image
renathras
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
I agree with @gnerphk , though. This thread was for a neat topic and something everyone should be generally awesome with - space exploration. Some day, climate change or no, Humans (or whatever species descends from us) will have to take to the stars or die. It's inevitable. Sol isn't going to be a happy, middle-aged star forever. The dude's gonna get a Red Giant belly at some point, and some horrible hot gas, eating Mercury and Venus in the process.

Either we (or our progeny) will have to leave Earth, or we'll have to move Earth. Either way, these first steps to a larger world could also potentially bring us together as a species and even a planet.

I've long said one of the best things that could ever happen to Humans is if we (a) detect signs of alien life, (b) realize that it's intelligent and technologically advanced, (c) realize that it's HOSTILE, and (d) realize that it's also pretty far away.

Because Humans tend to thrive on some form of conflict or "us vs them", and if we had an alien boogieman (that was conveniently far enough away to not ACTUALLY be a threat in the appreciable age of the universe...), then it would give us a "them" that isn't just another part of "us" to rally against. :)
91 days, 2 hours, 26 minutes ago
Profile Image
procrustes
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@renathras, @Gnerph, @Glyn

I say again, I made no argument relating to global warming, no premise. So my condescension was not to defend any ignorance, it was not to win any argument, or recover hurt pride because I have no standpoint on this. The reason for any condescension on my part was absolutely clear from the words in the above posts, being the absurdity of how I was attributed with a particular point of view, and the unsupported condescension within arguments.

@Glyn was offensively out of order

@Gnerph - whereas Glyn picked on the expression Global Warming and ranted, you complemented this with a pointed treatise on "condescension" without considering the context

@Renathras, I had read all your posts. Sorry if there was an appeal to reason, sorry if you feel attacked, and sorry if you think we can all come "together as a species" - the only point you made relevant to my original post.

I wrote 4 lines. I should have written, "It was the best of times it was the worst of times", I might have been attributed the full novel.

I'm out the chat so please dont waste time responding. @Glyn will have to apologise direct.
91 days, 1 hours, 6 minutes ago
View gnerphk's profile
gnerphk
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
It's spelled with a K at the end.

Well said, @Renathras. Space calls; who will answer?
91 days, 0 hours, 17 minutes ago
Profile Image
glynsalternate
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Martinr: The main problem is you have to first pick a location and how many years they last in that environment... deserts with wind end up scratching the glass decreasing their efficiency. Is it location based or a large solar plant that will have to up the voltage and lose efficiency the father it is transmitted. Even under the best conditions you are looking at least 5-8 years before they break even.

Mirrors reflecting onto a black container generating steam for a turbine is better for a power plant, downside is it will vaporize birds/bugs around the facility and mirrors also can get scratched.

Solar panels have their uses... running wires underground to new lights for a crosswalk is way more expensive than just having solar panels on them for the LED lights for example.

There are nanotech based solar panels that don't use glass and are flexible, they already are being manufactured but have sold out over a decades worth of production and they are defending their patent.

I do think Elon Musks solar roof tiles are a good idea since you get the electricity where you need it and are a great roofing material... but not so much in colder climates.

Instead I recommend solar thermal heating panels. They have a plastic layer, air gap and then black metal that a fluid is pumped through. They even work in winter so they are great for heating even all the way up here.
___

@Procrustes: How exactly would I go about apologizing to the people that ruined environmentalism and media? Not that I would... they are doing more harm than good and should be the ones apologizing.
_ _ _

"Procrustes: providing evidence that this is so"

The climate models the IPCC creates state what is natural forcing and what is anthropogenic... they made a big deal of it when anthropogenic forcing rose to match natural forcing because that essentially means we doubled the rate of warming.
90 days, 23 hours, 37 minutes ago
Profile Image
martinr
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Glyn 5-8 years is shorter than never.
90 days, 23 hours, 34 minutes ago
View gnerphk's profile
gnerphk
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Not always, @MartinR -- not if the panels don't last five years, as in some desert conditions that involve blowing sand.
90 days, 21 hours, 23 minutes ago
Profile Image
martinr
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Ah but that is the extreme and was the right solar panel recommended for use?

Obviously early solar panel development problem and customers not knowing the shoddy sales force recommending products not up for the job.

But not in extreme situations they repay the energy use for manufacture. Reduce energy loss due to transfer if at source of use.

So in most cases are more environmentally friendly (if also recycled at the end of their life span).
90 days, 18 hours, 11 minutes ago
Profile Image
domodedovo
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
there's only one way mankind will get to the stars:
frozen fertilized human ova, taken care and raised by AI machines.
90 days, 15 hours, 28 minutes ago
View capt chaos's profile
capt chaos
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
So just what is the "Correct Temperature" of the planet? Glacial like when there were mastodons? Tropical like when there were dinosaurs? Little Ice Age temps? Assuming someone can actually answer this question, how can we control something that has never been controlled?
90 days, 15 hours, 4 minutes ago
Profile Image
martinr
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Capt+Chaos we have Glacial to Tropical to 50'C on the same planet!

Its not picking a temp but slowing the changes in the areas we have currently.
90 days, 14 hours, 16 minutes ago
View capt chaos's profile
capt chaos
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
How did it change from Tropical to Glacial?
90 days, 12 hours, 22 minutes ago
Profile Image
glynsalternate
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Martinr: For where you and I live, it is 'never', just not enough sunlight. We get 1/4 of the solar hours they use as the break-even baseline. For our latitude the 2-axis Sun tracking is also important and without it we're even farther from the break-even claims, so even 1/4 sunlight is being generous since the angle our sunlight comes at changes dramatically over the seasons.

People don't really care about that though, it's more about saving money on their electricity bill which continues to take less years to break even.

I looked into going with solar panels two decades ago when they were at 20% efficiency... and I just checked and the best available are at 22.70% efficiency. Labs have made 40% efficient ones but I guess they haven't seen the light of day yet.

:P

Googled and saw that they have thin film solar panels now that use way less glass and thus why they are claiming they break even in as little as four years... the silicon wafer ones however still use a lot of glass. Some of the thin film solar panels are even flexible due to polymer encapsulation which is news to me. So yes I wasn't aware of these new type of solar panels, but then I wasn't technically speaking about things I didn't know that existed, especially since they are still a niche market of solar cell industry... can't even find a residential installer of this type. But this is why I said focus on improving technology should be our focus and not kneecapping our economies to appease environmentalist fanatics.

Mainly I concern myself with biodiversity... so mainly I oppose developing more land, which means a big NO to massive solar panel plants. Obviously deserts are a lower concern, but then you have transmission inefficiency and extra wearing of the panels. They actually invented a robot to clean the dust/sand off of panels somewhere because paying people to clean them cost too much... yeah robots!

I've also heard of photovoltaic glass which could replace all our windows throwing out the concerns about energy spent on their manufacturing since the glass is being manufactured either way. Think they just make the cells transparent but essentially just looks like tinted glass.







90 days, 12 hours, 14 minutes ago
Profile Image
glynsalternate
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Oh, and I saw a technology to basically make the surface out of 3D printed acrylic plastic with tiny lenses and mirrors so that you don't need to track the sun and also a much much higher efficiency as the light is concentrated and fewer cells required. Stumbled upon that when I fell down the 3D printing rabbit hole on YouTube.
90 days, 5 hours, 30 minutes ago
Profile Image
renathras
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Domodedovo - The first problem is finding a suitable place to build a colony. Before going anywhere, you need to know where you're going. After that, it's a question of speed and distance. At 10% of light speed, a trip to Proxima Centauri (which DOES have an Earth sized planet, we now believe...) would take ~42 years. At 20%, 21 years. This isn't a short trip at all. And that's the nearest star. Of course, relativistic effects are more complex than that, but that's the scope of expansion, considering stars move around, but over very long time periods (the Sol and A/B/C Centauri system are going to be relatively this distance for the next few hundred thousand years, first getting slowly closer then slowly receding), but it's not impossible if we extend Human lifespans to ~120 years for this to be feasible.

The trick is first identifying a target, then working on engines. Cryo-frozen test tube babies are probably never going to be the solution. You might bring such things along for genetic diversity, but you're going to need some adults to teach them (and for ethical reasons), and will have no shortage of scientist/researchers willing to engage in a multi-decade trip to be the first to do so.

First stop, though, is Luna and then Mars. Going farther is a bit hyper-ambitious until we get that part right.

.

@Martinr - My biggest problem with climate change proponents is that they engage in rampant hyperbole and that they reject realistic solutions because they REALLY just want THEIR solutions. In many cases, I believe these are well-meaning people that just get swept up in the tides of emotion and wanting to "do the right thing", but the politicians in charge of these movements do it for reasons of power and ideology, and I am under no delusions on that.

Realistically, we should be going for an all of the above approach, that focuses on adapting present technologies while developing new ones. For example, people have been pushing for all-electric cars for at least three decades now. Meanwhile, we've had hybrids for at least two decades. If we could get everyone into hybrids, that would cut carbon emissions by something like 1/3 to 1/2. But instead, we don't do it because of the relentless push for 100% electrics or bust.

Basically, it's a case of letting "the good be the enemy of the perfect", if you're familiar with that concept.

It's also trying to push a single "one size fits all" solution to the problem, which just doesn't work. Mass solar banks and mirror heating boilers work great in dry deserts for power generation (but they have wear and maintenance issues, of course), but don't work very well in higher latitudes due shorter days and a higher angle of incidence with the incoming solar rays. Likewise, geothermal works well, but only in certain areas (and can have detrimental effects on surrounding environments). Indeed, MOST "clean" power solutions require large landmass areas, meaning they have a bigger negative impact on the local environment and plant and animal species than even a super-dirty coal plants would, and wind turbines have (literally...) cut short the lives of a lot of birds, including endangered species.

Nuclear is a good solution for large power grids, but not for super small scale (though I believe people are working on that, and the holy grail of the fusion, rather than fission, reactor; for those who don't know, fusion has no waste [you're combining hydrogens into heliums], though it requires a lot of energy to kickstart it - atomic bombs are fusion bombs, which use an outer shell of fission bomb to compress the inside tight enough to initiate fusion, basically...) And I've seen some promising work on carbon recapture for natural gas plants, which would make them much cleaner while allowing for small scale operations.

But the biggest problem is small mobile things. While nuclear plants can be used for ships, and modular plants the size of 18-wheeler trailers are being worked on for bringing power to remote areas or disaster struck areas (scalable by putting several in parallel), when it comes to cars, you're stuck with fuel burning or toxic batteries that still have limited range. But if we could get a serious move towards hybrids, this, paired with the "all of the above" approach to stationary power plants to the cleaner nuclear, natural gas, etc, would make a huge dent in carbon emissions.

But as long as people are pushing for 100% clean or nothing...we get nothing.

It's really sad, because instead of meaningful chipping at the problem, we get nothing. And I thin that's @Glyn's point, too...?
90 days, 5 hours, 14 minutes ago
Profile Image
rexe
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
The best way to deal with a troll ... if you can't put them in the exhaust chute of a rocket and incinerate them .... is to load them on a freighter and drop them at an amorphous outpost.

For the love of all ... please stop feeding them. If you ignore them, they might go away. They certainly aren't going to read your novel.

To the Moon !!!!!
89 days, 15 hours, 2 minutes ago
Profile Image
glynsalternate
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
@Renathras: I also see a lot of attempts to make the world a better place end up making things worse. For example free food and clothes sent to Africa in the short term helps, but in the long term eliminates their textile and farming industries... and they don't have all that many industries to begin with.

Environmentalism suffers from the same shortsightedness because they start with the assumption everything they do is good. When just a few nations are dumping garbage into rivers that flow into the ocean and our solution is to make robots to clean the ocean instead of the rivers... I feel like these people are just trying to profit off a problem, not actually solve the problem.

The vast majority of people start with a conclusion and look to evidence that supports it... instead of looking at the evidence and trying to draw conclusions. People are also drawn to simple answers to complex problems especially because they aren't personal problems of which most people already struggle to solve.
_ _ _

I'm assuming you are from Texas based on your profile image... well I'm from 'Canadian Texas', aka Alberta, so we probably have a similar environment and why we both ended up on the more skeptical end of the spectrum.

My own experience was religious conservatives all around me but a full blown Marxist media blasted in my face daily. Eventually this lead me to see flaws in 'both sides' and couldn't align with either. It seems when inundated with only one way of looking at things, shocker... you adopt that viewpoint and then 'both sides' will attack you.

I find people that are full of doubt and skepticism are the only ones you can even have a conversation with, just a futile waste of time otherwise.
89 days, 14 hours, 53 minutes ago
Profile Image
glynsalternate
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Like Gnerphk, I would love to have a place to have these non-Planets.Nu related conversations, but ultimately it is a bit pointless and gums up the Activity Feed. Although it's pretty dead during the Summer months (Northern Hemisphere anyhow).
89 days, 14 hours, 51 minutes ago
View tom graves's profile
tom graves
RE: Anyone else see this? I'm very excited! ...Write Reply
Check out the birth of SkyNet:

https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-satellites-spotted-night-sky-video.html?utm_source=notification

Err, they're calling it Star Link, but we all KNOW what it really is.