4 ms·

This. IMHO, humanity's goal for the next hundred years is to enhance our energy and medical technologies as quickly as possible. (space takes a distant third)

by rhino42 15y ago

This. IMHO, humanity's goal for the next hundred years is to enhance our energy and medical technologies as quickly as possible. (space takes a distant third). We are essentially in a race against time: if we are too slow, we will deplete our resources and wipe ourselves out. There are lots and lots of things that are worth a single human's life (or tens, hundreds of lives). Research is one of them. For instance, if we could magically trade a random 100 lives for knowing if there is extraterrestrial life, I believe that it's a worthy trade. That's just one example.

JumpCrisscross 15y ago
You know where there are lots of resources? Space. Recently ran an economic projection for a venture that was being proposed out of Russia - tugging an asteroid of copper into orbit around Earth and mining it would alleviate the environmental impact of surface mining while cutting the price of these materials to a fraction of what they are today. Speaking about energy, check out space-based solar power. I will be the first to admit that present conceptions are as pre-mature as the solar industry in general, but, it is theoretically a vastly more efficient way to generate power than other options, barring nuclear.
- salemh 15y ago
  To make an endeavor feasible, it would really have to be a GX large-scale multi-nation effort, and, the agreed (tacit or otherwise) collapse of certain industries (like, collapsing copper pricing, etc.) I don't believe the current socio-political-industrial-financial mechanisms in place have any desire (though don't actively "conspire" against this sort of thing), as its too "long term" thinking, and, is really more a "species survival" deal vs short-term profit gaining. /This is rambling, apologies. thoughts?
  - JumpCrisscross 15y ago
    Wouldn't be more expensive than anything the oil or heavy infrastructure majors undertake on their own today. Yes, a multi-billion dollar project all in, but that occurs in stages. The time horizon is a problem. But everything I said fits the 4-10 year infrastructure ROI test. Not that I don't expect the first projects to have anything short of heavy government involvement.

by rhino42 15y ago

JumpCrisscross 15y ago

You know where there are lots of resources? Space. Recently ran an economic projection for a venture that was being proposed out of Russia - tugging an asteroid of copper into orbit around Earth and mining it would alleviate the environmental impact of surface mining while cutting the price of these materials to a fraction of what they are today. Speaking about energy, check out space-based solar power. I will be the first to admit that present conceptions are as pre-mature as the solar industry in general, but, it is theoretically a vastly more efficient way to generate power than other options, barring nuclear.

salemh 15y ago
To make an endeavor feasible, it would really have to be a GX large-scale multi-nation effort, and, the agreed (tacit or otherwise) collapse of certain industries (like, collapsing copper pricing, etc.) I don't believe the current socio-political-industrial-financial mechanisms in place have any desire (though don't actively "conspire" against this sort of thing), as its too "long term" thinking, and, is really more a "species survival" deal vs short-term profit gaining. /This is rambling, apologies. thoughts?
- JumpCrisscross 15y ago
  Wouldn't be more expensive than anything the oil or heavy infrastructure majors undertake on their own today. Yes, a multi-billion dollar project all in, but that occurs in stages. The time horizon is a problem. But everything I said fits the 4-10 year infrastructure ROI test. Not that I don't expect the first projects to have anything short of heavy government involvement.