> I look forward to your plan of parking a small sun somewhere (Tasman 
> Sea?)

Paris! :-)
Failing Paris, Waiouru looks like a good place. [[Google maps fails 
the Waiouru test miserably]][[Must be a good place for a nuke 
station]]..


Location not a major issue.
If you can find places to put fusion stations now, and if the French 
can let off H bombs under coral atolls in my back yard when they wish 
to, because they can , then finding places to put waste free fusion 
stations that are within the yield range of existing fission stations 
should not be overly hard.
:-)

> or the alternate of using H-bombs to power a Stirling engine, 
> Orion-style.

Orion and Stirling don't mix alas - plays havoc with the displacers.

:-)

>  I'm not sure how the fantasy (and it is, at this point)

Absolutely. Anything that doesn't exist is.
Anything that we don't (yet) know how to make exist, even more so.
That it can exist is engineering certainty.
Whether we will ever do it is not.

> ... of He3 trashes the
> peak oil argument.  Peak oil is just stating the half-way mark. 
> While you
> can quibble about the date, which depends on rubbery figures, 
> outright lies,
> new technology, abiogenics, new discoveries etc, it will happen.

Agree - BUT - I was using the term "peak oil" as it is used BUT in a 
wider context than it is intended in its purest form.
The wider argument is something like "There is a point where oil 
production will peak and forever after diminish. There is nothing 
available that will replace it that has a net energy gain after you 
take account of all the externals. We will therefore have an 
increasing demand-supply energy gap. Therefore we are all doomed." The 
evangelical versions of this add a chorus of 'We are all doomed' after 
every full stop (including the last) in the above Mantra.

I agree that there will come a point where we use up half/much of the 
oil. But the wider implications are less certain to the point of 
scaremongering. He3 fusion has the great appeal (even if presently 
fantasy) of having so great a output-input energy gap that it trashes 
the above larger argument.

> In the mean time, fire up the He3 miners,

First vee need zee 100 billion dollars international investment (3 
months from Iraq budget should do OK). ZEN vunce wee haff zee system 
working vee fire up zee miners. In dee interim vee may vish to bild 
der better sace sheeps. Zen vee get zee trillion dollars final payment 
for capital verks and vee are away ! [[I have no idea what the point 
of zee accent is - or what it represents - but itseems to go with zee 
mad scientist image that's part of all this]].

> dig holes thru the mantle,

Too hard. No need. Easier methods. Earth may bleed to death.

> cover deserts with solar collectors

viable. choose well.

> & wind farms,

same

> build greenhouses with kilometer high chimneys

wait and see how the Oz one works out.

> kick the surfers off the beach so make room for the tidal 
> generators,

No need. Plenty of sea power for all. Just needs a serious development 
effort by "the world". The problem is NOT the availability of seapower 
but making the systems last. The sea loves to tear things apart and 
wave power systems are certainly no exception.

> and give everyone an exercise bike with a generator.

Only for the keen and green.
I design them :-)

> One of these might work.

Several would.
Nuclear had a very nice government leg up when no expense spared made 
total sense.
Give some alternatives the same treatment and other systems would 
shine [:-)].

Arguably the biggest thermal solar issue is being able to make large 
collectors that last adequately long at a good price. Given a billion 
dollars, do you think you could achieve an order of magnitude cost 
effectiveness of existing domestic solar thermal collectors over 
existing designs? I think I may be able to. "Ten times cheaper" is 
liable to make quite a difference.

The solar energy that falls on my house roof in a year would cost 10 
to 15 times more than my total annual power bill as heat at domestic 
rates. I'm a rather heavy power user. Recovering 10% of that at a cost 
not in excess of current domestic rates long term would make the 
system viable. I believe it's possible. Implemented world-wide 
wherever it's possible (not everywhere) it would transform our energy 
picture. Within  a year I hope to have  a proof of concept system 
working - but probably wont have and may never start on it. But ...


        Russell



-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist