Of Space, ISS and MIR

[Aphex_Twin]

I was wondering...

If there are any Economists out there. How much time and money would it be necessary to make the space program pay for itself (in actual money, bu also tourism revenue)?

 

[Xen]

depends on if spaceflight can be made cheap- but in my opinion, if we can ever pioneer thiose sub orbatla "space planes", then a space station resrt would not be that out of the question

 

[col]

Its pretty hard to evaluate the benefits of the space program. The two most often quoted spinoffs are the invention of teflon - non stick surfaces and the integrated circuit and microcomputer. I couldnt begin to estimate financially how much the second two would be worth - a lot more than the entire NASA budget forever I'd say.

 

[Aphex_Twin]

Indirectly, there are deffinate benefits, but theese (as col said) are unquantifyable.

A more outlandish question: How long will it be until there will be a more or less self-sustained space economy? Given that "accidents" as teflon won't occur.

 

[smalltalk]

Wikipedia says about Teflon:

Teflon®, a registered trademark of the DuPont corporation. Discovered by Roy J. Plunkett (1910-1994) in 1938 and introduced as a commercial product in 1949.
...
Teflon is the most common example given of a spin-off from the US Space industry with more down-to-earth applications, even though it was discovered in 1938 and first sold commercially in 1946.

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teflon


As for microcomputers, I'm not sure either. Spaceflight might have stimulated and sped up the development of large-scale integrated chips, but I feel we would now have microcomputers anyway, regardless if there was Space Flight or not.

This is what the National Air and Space Museum says about the fiirst computers in Apollo program:

The Block I design nevertheless embodied a number of advances in computing technology, which later became commonplace for space and aircraft computers. These include a compact, rugged packaging scheme, an all-digital design, the control of a craft by a digital computer in real time, the use of a digital display and keyboard (DSKY), and the use of Integrated Circuits. When production of Block I computers began in 1963-64, they consumed a considerable fraction of all the integrated circuits then in existence in the world.

Block I computers played a transitional role in Apollo, and as such are of secondary importance to their successors that were used in manned missions. Nevertheless, Block I computers incorporated most of the dramatic technical breakthroughs in digital technology that one identifies with Apollo. They occupy a special place in history as one of the first places where the now-common silicon "chip" was first used.

http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/dsh/artifacts/GC-ApolloBlock1.htm

 

[Speedo]

The problem though is that (AFAIK) the patents on things like that are all held by private individuals or corporations, so the space program itself (NASA) isn't getting any money from them.

 

[Laughing Gull]

It could easily be profitable. they could charge 2,000,000$ per ticket, and the world's rich and elite would still line up around the block for the chance to go.
IMNEGOAO*.....the only way it will happen is if NASA is hardly involved. talk about a bureaucracy full of stubborn old men. I mean jeez.. the space shuttle's computers are still powered by microprocessors from like 1980. if you even want to call them microprocessors. my TV's remote control has more processing power than those things. this leads me to believe that the NASA culture is very resistant to change.

I think it is only possible to have a 'space resort' if several of the largest companies around pooled their resources, and put fresh-minded individuals in charge of things, using the latest technology. NASA would serve as a consultant. The companies would split the profits evenly.



*new acronym = In My Non-Educated Guess Of An Opinion

Edit: I just realized I was slightly off topic. please forgive the errant caffine-fueled rant. I'll be going now.

 

[Laughing Gull]

but not before I post THIS
STATUS REPORT
Date Released: Thursday, November 06, 2003
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Testimony of Dr. David R. Criswell: Senate Hearing on "Lunar Exploration"

Testimony of Dr. David R. Criswell at Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space Hearings: "Lunar Exploration"
Thursday, November 6, 2003, 2:30 PM – SR-253

Dr. David R. Criswell, Director, Institute for Space Systems Operations, University of Houston and University of Houston-Clear Lake

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I am honored to have this opportunity to introduce a program for the economic and environmental security for Earth, and especially for the United States of America, by meeting Earth's real electrical power needs.

By 2050, approximately 10 billion people will live on Earth demanding ~5 times the power now available. By then, solar power from the Moon could provide everyone clean, affordable, and sustainable electric power. No terrestrial options can provide the needed minimum of 2 kWe/person or at least 20 terawatts globally.

Solar power bases will be built on the Moon that collect a small fraction of the Moon's dependable solar power and convert it into power beams that will dependably deliver lunar solar power to receivers on Earth. On Earth each power beam will be transformed into electricity and distributed, on-demand, through local electric power grids. Each terrestrial receiver can accept power directly from the Moon or indirectly, via relay satellites, when the receiver cannot view the Moon. The intensity of each power beam is restricted to 20%, or less, of the intensity of noontime sunlight. Each power beam can be safely received, for example, in an industrially zoned area.

The Lunar Solar Power (LSP) System does not require basic new technological developments. Adequate knowledge of the Moon and the essential technologies have been available since the late 1970s to design, build, and operate the LSP System. Automated machines and people would be sent to the Moon to build the lunar power bases. The machines would build the power components from the common lunar dust and rocks, thereby avoiding the high cost of transporting materials from the Earth to the Moon. The LSP System is distributed and open. Thus, it can readily accommodate new manufacturing and operating technologies as they become available.

Engineers, scientists, astronauts, and managers skilled in mining, manufacturing, electronics, aerospace, and industrial production of commodities will create new wealth on the Moon. Thousands of tele-robotic workers in American facilities, primarily on Earth, will oversee the lunar machinery and maintain the LSP System.

Our national space program, in cooperation with advanced U.S. industries, can produce the LSP System for a small fraction of the cost of building equivalent power generating capabilities on Earth. Shuttle- and Space Station-derived systems and LSP production machinery can be in operation in space and on the Moon within a few years. A demonstration LSP System can grow quickly to 50% of averaged U.S. electric consumption, ~0.2 TWe, within 15 years and be profitable thereafter. When LSP provides 20 terawatts of electric power to Earth it can sell the electricity at one-fifth of today's cost or ~1 ¢/kWe-h. At current electric prices LSP would generate ~9 trillion dollars per year of net income.

Like hydroelectric dams, every power receiver on Earth can be an engine of clean economic growth. Gross World Product can increase a factor of 10. The average annual per capita income of Developing Nations can increase from today's $2,500 to ~$20,000. Economically driven emigrations, such as from Mexico and Central America to the United States, will gradually decrease.

Increasingly wealthy Developing Nations will generate new and rapidly growing markets for American goods and services. Lunar power can generate hydrogen to fuel cars at low cost and with no release of greenhouse gases. United States payments to other nations for oil, natural gas, petrochemicals, and commodities such as fertilizer will decrease. LSP industries will establish new, high-value American jobs. LSP will generate major investment opportunities for Americans. The average American income could increase from today's ~$35,000/y-person to more than $150,000/y-person.

By 2050, the LSP System would allow all human societies to prosper while nurturing rather than consuming the biosphere.

Respectfully submitted,

Dr. David R. Criswell, Director, Institute for Space Systems Operations, University of Houston and University of Houston-Clear Lake, Houston, TX The Lunar Solar Power System and its general benefits are described in the attached fourpage document.

Additional papers are available on these websites and via search engines (search on "David R. Criswell" or "Lunar Solar Power"):

The Industrial Physicist http://www.tipmagazine.com

 

[superslug]

Originally posted by Laughing Gull
the space shuttle's computers are still powered by microprocessors from like 1980. if you even want to call them microprocessors. my TV's remote control has more processing power than those things. this leads me to believe that the NASA culture is very resistant to change.

For starters, it takes up to four years for NASA to figure out how to make microprocessors functional in zero-g. The Hubble is running on 486's!!

Secondly, so what if the Shuttle is using old tech? Granted, we've lost two of them, but in neither case was it due to how old it's microprocessors were...the flaws and dangers in the space program are people not products.

Back on the general topic, I think an orbital resort is a wonderful idea. Tickets would generally go to the rich elite to start with, but with each passing flight the overhead would get cheaper and ticket prices would eventually fall to levels where the middle class could get in on the action.

From there, the moon...

 

[Laughing Gull]

Originally posted by superslug

For starters, it takes up to four years for NASA to figure out how to make microprocessors functional in zero-g. The Hubble is running on 486's!!

Secondly, so what if the Shuttle is using old tech? Granted, we've lost two of them, but in neither case was it due to how old it's microprocessors were...the flaws and dangers in the space program are people not products.

I did not know that. Where did you get that information? I would like to read through it and maybee I'll have a better understanding like you.

Your second paragraph is quite reasonbly stated and I'll buy it. Still I think NASA need not be involved in such a project. I have not been very happy with their track record. I think private companies would be more efficient.

 

[superslug]

The four year delay was something I learned when they had a 'recent' shuttle flight to conduct upgrades to the Hubble. This was obviously before Columbia...

I think that in the long run, commercially driven tourism/colonization of space will drive NASA to further heights in exploration. However, I do believe they should be done as independently as possible.

 

[Speedo]

You have to remember, upgrading something like the shuttle/Hubble (or any modern aircraft) isn't a simple procedure. It's not like a home PC, where you just drop in a new processor, motherboard, or whatever. A hardware upgrade will probably require upgrading or modifying most of the hardware on the aircraft so that all systems integrate properly, and will probably also require new software to run properly.

 

[Aphex_Twin]

Originally posted by Laughing Gull
The only way it will happen is if NASA is hardly involved. talk about a bureaucracy full of stubborn old men. I mean jeez.. the space shuttle's computers are still powered by microprocessors from like 1980. if you even want to call them microprocessors. my TV's remote control has more processing power than those things. this leads me to believe that the NASA culture is very resistant to change.

Rest assured, if the Shuttle actually NEEDED higher brain power it would have it. NASA prefers to keep it's big computers on the ground (and for good reasons). It's not a matter of infrastructure. Today's microprocessors are very complicated pieces of technology, and also very sensitive to radiation. A Pentium XP at 2400 MHz would break down in a couple of months. Earlier computers are simple, easier to handle and most important, have a rough build which allows them to survive the space enviroment.

But in general, computers don't need half their current power. It's been a lie perpetuated by the increasingly complicated (but not increasingly sophisticated, and increasingly less-reliable) operating systems of Microsoft.