SOLAR GETS CHEAPER WITH TIME. FRC
Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows From: Jones Beene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2022 12:55 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:A New Way to Achieve Nuclear Fusion Even so - isn't it true that the bottom line is that it will be far cheaper to make solar cells, given the abundance of silicon on the moon - and get electrical power that way compared with fusion. Far far far cheaper. Robin <mixent...@aussiebroadband.com.au> wrote: In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 18 Dec 2022 08:33:26 -0500: Hi, >In that case, a robotic mining system would suffice. Combine that with >Heinlein's mass driver and we're all set. Note that 12 kWh/m^2 was a high order estimate. Given the size of the Moon, and Earth currently using about 500 quad / annum, the total resource would last us at most 3 years, if it had to supply all our energy needs. I think it might be a better idea to just use the Lunar He3 as a local resource to provide power for a Lunar colony and further exploration of the Solar system. Here on Earth, we can "easily" make our own from the D + D -> He3 + n reaction. (Or if my device works, the H + D -> He3 reaction). > >Well, we need a hot Fusion device first. [snip] Cloud storage:- Unsafe, Slow, Expensive ...pick any three.
