At 02:35 AM 3/11/2009, Dan Olner wrote:
>Hi,
>
>The most useful overview of future sustainable energy scenarios I've 
>found thus far is Nathan Lewis':
>
>http://nsl.caltech.edu/energy.html
>
>The streaming presentation is a down-to-earth outline of possible 
>energy futures that keep us under a range of different CO2ppm 
>levels, with some very useful ballpark figures using the Kaya 
>Identity (combining energy and carbon output.)
>
>There's rather a lot more work to be done, both in modelling and in 
>R&D, before anyone can say what particular solutions might get us to 
>a safe level of CO2. Good luck to the space-energy folks - here's some more -
>
>http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/20/0149254
>
>  - but as Nathan Lewis suggests, I suspect this option won't end up 
> being the most cost-effective, even if someone can actually invent it.

It was invented 40 years ago by Dr. Peter Glaser of ADL.  The problem 
has always been economic, more specifically the cost of lifting power 
satellite parts to GEO.

There is no reason from physics that the cost to GEO has to be 
high.  A moving cable space elevator would cost a share of capital 
(100 billion perhaps) plus 15 kWh/kg.  Alas, we don't have the cable 
and may or may not ever get it.

But it looks like a combination of sub orbital rockets and multi GW 
lasers could get the cost down to under $100/kg for a traffic model 
in the million ton/year range.  At that price, penny a kWh 
electricity and dollar a gallon synthetic fuel are possible.

In fact, such an energy source could be built up to the 100 TW 
level.  Half of that, 50 TW is enough to take 100 ppm of carbon out 
of the air, reduce it to synthetic oil and put it back in the ground 
in 12 years.

Some people have had trouble opening the power point presentation.  I 
will try to convert it to a web page and let you know when it is up.

Keith Henson

>Dan
>
>
>________________________________
>
>From: News and discussion about computer simulation in the social 
>sciences on behalf of hkhenson
>Sent: Wed 11/03/2009 03:39
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [SIMSOC] Simulation of the Sustainable Development Paradox
>
>
>
>At 06:46 PM 3/10/2009, Luis Gutierrez wrote:
> >The "sustainable development paradox" is the apparent contradiction
> >between economic development and ecological sustainability.  I am
> >familiar with simulations of the sustainable development process
> >using the "system dynamics" method (e.g., the "limits to growth"
> >project). Can anyone help me with a bibliography of (preferably
> >online) simulation models/studies about this topic using other
> >methods?  Is anyone aware of web-based simulations of sustainable
> >development scenarios?
>
>The models are sensitive to the technological assumptions made.  Here
>
>www.operatingthetan.com/SpaceBasedSolarPower/March18Talk.ppt
>
>I have shown (or tried to show) that there is a technical way to
>replace fossil fuels and even stuff 100 ppm of atmospheric carbon
>back in the ground.  It depends on a 200 to one reduction in the cost
>of lifting power satellite parts to GEO and that depends on a rocket
>and laser kludge to get the cost down.
>
> >I am currently planning an issue on "simulations of the sustainable
> >development paradox."  Need all the help I can get.
>
>I know something about this.  :-)  Our L5 Society team, including the
>physicist Dr. Peter J. Vajk, was nearly thrown out of a Limits to
>Growth conference in Houston in 1975.  They didn't want to hear about
>an engineering project that would invalidate their models of gigadeath.
>
>Keith