Re: U.S. Can Remain Strongest Nation Via Space and Ocean Resources
- From: Scotius <yodasbud@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 18:50:46 -0400
In article <88416eb9-30bf-4560-8ea6-eed3275ce223
@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, giveitawhril2008@xxxxxxxxx says...
Submitted on Greta Van Susteren's blog about Gas Prices:
One time I said to a coworker that though I'm not a socialist, I would
not mind if, supposing the U.S. were sitting on a sea of oil or some
other equally valuable resource, we were one giant Kuwait and the
government DID pay for and give us everything! That is, if the gov't
could afford this, then go ahead! But of course the gov't cannot
afford to do everything for us, even if it takes ALL the money from
people who earn it and redistributes the wealth.
My coworker, a woman who previously had worked for NASA, said we DO
have a valuable resource like that: the space program! I initially
disagreed with her. What was she talking about? But I have kept on
thinking about this and related things. Believe it or not, I think she
is on to something! This is NOT a short-term solution, BUT: if the
U.S. expands its economy into outer space, we will acquire resources
that in the LONG run will be very useful. Expensive at first, with a
long run payoff. Kind of like Seward's Folly.
You know what the greatest, essentially inexhaustible source of energy
in the solar system is. Someday, facilities in orbit fairly close to
the Sun could collect all the energy we need, convert it, say, to
antimatter, and then it could be transported back to Earth. The solar
system has many other valuable resources, as well. Like I said: LONG
TERM! But worth it!
It would be cheaper and healthier to put manufacturing bases on
the moon, and mine helium 3 there to power them. Helium 3 has a fusion
temperature far lower than hydrogen, and produces less radiation also.
The idea of turning the energy of the sun into anti-matter is kind of
insane, I think. It's true that 1kg of anti-matter has the same energy
as 47 ten megaton nuclear warheads, but how would you contain any kind
of anti-matter reaction? Also, are you aware that anti-matter/matter
reactions would produce far more radiation than even the dirtiest
nuclear weapons?
One other suggestion: that the U.S., for general and energy purposes,
as well as to remain economically ahead of the European SuperState,
and China, and EVERYONE, sets up a big program to acquire control of
the lion's share of UNDER OCEAN resources!
Russia just recently claimed a huge slice of the Arctic, including
resources on the sea floor. Too late.
Well, Greta, when are you going to invite me on the show to promote my
space and ocean plan? :-) If you do, please wear something black, to
symbolize the "New Ocean:" SPACE!
BTW - If I ever run for office, it will be as a Republican. But I
nevertheless insist that NASA reacquire about 4% of the federal
budget, like it had in the Apollo days. Plus 4% for the Ocean
Resources Project. Another 4% for GENERAL ENERGY research, including
fusion! A nearly 12% increase! But in the long run, the U.S. becomes
energy independent and remains the world's largest economy! Then OPEC,
Europe, China and Russia can stick it!
...yeah! And your kindergarten teacher Ms. Nasty as well!
.
- Prev by Date: Re: A question for other conservatives
- Next by Date: Re: one of the 911 hijackers had an anthrax lesion on his leg
- Previous by thread: Re: U.S. Can Remain Strongest Nation Via Space and Ocean Resources
- Next by thread: Suffering will be good for American Character
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
