Commercial applications of Space Elevators? Um ... let capitalism figger it out. Build it and the apps will come, it says here:
http://www.liftport.com/faqs/index.php?fuseAction=faq&fgID=14&faqID=28 Some of the industries mentioned -- pharmaceuticals, semiconductor manufacturing -- have put microgravity to experimental uses, but mainly to factor high gravity out of processes under study. The results have been applied not in how to manufacture in space, but on Earth. "Pure crystal growth" seems to be a mantra among some space enthusiasts, but the reality seems to be that people do pretty well these days at 1 G. Microgravity still doesn't have a killer app, at any price point. Solar power satellites (also mentioned) are still alive as an idea, but would require yet further investment, in the usual O'Neill Scenario of mining the moon or bringing in asteroids. Take solar power gear up on the elevator itself? At $100/lb added cost, it probably still makes more sense to keep solar on the ground. Interestingly, this site gives short shrift to space tourism as a market. It does, however, talk about beyond-Earth missions, some of which are currently funded in the 9-figure (dollar) range. This *is* a definite, current market, even if it's basically only governments as customers. Much of what's going on in micro/nano/picosat research may, however, radically reduce the costs of payload design and integration, as well as reducing the payload weights. You don't need giant clean rooms and armies of technicians to put together and test (and re-test) space probes if the whole package comes out of a microscale fab's cleanroom already integrated, largely by processes that have been automated. The day may come when you can think about taking a freshly-minted satellite off a microscale fab line ordinarily used to make custom terrestrial equipment, wrap it in plastic, then in bubblepak, put it in a box, and ship it FedEx. If you replace "cost per orbited pound" with some more appropriate metric like "cost per function point" or something, costs to orbit for unmanned missions could start dropping radically in 5-10 years, even with costs per orbited pound staying high. If nanotech is the key to getting large masses in orbit cheaply, it may also be its Enemy Number One in terms of yielding a market. Markets, however, aren't everything -- some government might come up with the gigabucks that a manned Mars mission would cost. -michael turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
