The Ares V - Super Rocket

In my opinion, the development of the Ares V is NASA's most important project. The worse mistake the US ever made was decommissioning our only heavy lift vehicle (the Saturn V) back in the early 1970's. The Saturn V not only put men on the Moon but placed America's first space station (Skylab) into orbit. During the gap between the Apollo moon program and the Space shuttle program, we could have used the Saturn V to launch more Skylabs and the first large rotational simulated gravity space stations.




By the time the Space Shuttle program had begun, it would have already had a space station or stations to visit. Then we could have used the Saturn V in combination with the Space Shuttle to set up a permanent base on the Moon during the 1980s using reusable OTVs (orbital transfer vehicles) and reusable lunar landers. The 1980's could have been the greatest space era in American and world history.

With the development of the Ares V, America will once again have heavy lift capability again. The Ares V will enable us to launch over 180 tonnes into low earth orbit (Skylab only weighed 77 tonnes); 70 tonnes into lunar orbit; and between 15 to 20 tonnes on the lunar surface. The Ares V will give America the ability to begin the human colonization of the Moon and the ability to exploit the natural resources of the moons of Mars in order to make a lunar colony independent of the Earth's resources.


Unfortunately, we might not see the Ares V in operation until after the year 2020-- if ever-- thanks to the lack of proper funding for the project. Former NASA administrator Mike Griffin blamed the Bush administration for the lack of adequate funding for the Ares V program.

NASA's $19 billion a year budget (less than two months in Iraq) may not have enough money in it for the Ares V. The replacement for the Space Shuttle, the Ares 1, may cost over $40 billion dollars over the next 6 years. Our commitment to the International Space Station (the mission to nowhere) is going to cost over $2 billion a year.


If I were Charles Bolden, Obama's new NASA administrator, I would:

1. Prioritize funding for the Ares V in order to accelerate the its development.

2. I would change the Constellation lunar sortie program to a lunar base program with a prefabricated lunar facility already built and properly shielded by robots sent by the Ares V before the first astronauts arrived on the lunar surface.

3. I would ask Obama to add an extra $4 billion a year specifically to fund the Ares V and the lunar base program. And if he said that he couldn't raise the NASA budget then I'd recommend that the money come from reducing our commitment to the ISS and ending the development of the Ares 1 and replace it with the much cheaper man rating of one of the Delta Heavy vehicles.



It would be nice to have humans return to the Moon and to a permanent facility during the last year of the Obama administration in 2016. But I guess I'd be satisfied if America had a moon base at least before the year 2020. John Kennedy got us to the Moon in 8 years using primitive 1960's technology. So I would be extremely disappointed if it took America more than a decade to establish a permanent human presence on the Moon-- our closest celestial neighbor and the gateway to the solar system.


Links and References

1. Ares V (Wikipedia)
2. Constellation (Wikipedia)
3. Constellation (NASA)
4. Ares V (NASA)

Robots Could Build a Base on the Moon

Two ATHLETE robots joining twin habitat modules together

Establishing a permanent and continuously growing human presence on the surface of the Earth's moon could be a pivotal point in human cultural evolution. Humans could utilize the lunar regolith to produce oxygen for breathing and as a chemical component of water. Additionally 5 to 10 meters of lunar soil could be used to shield lunar habitats from the deleterious effect of cosmic radiation. If humans living at a lunar facility for several years can remain healthy and perhaps even reproduce under the Moon's 1/6 hypogravity environment then humanity will no longer have to confine its existence to the surface of the Earth, allowing us to expand human civilization to the Moon, Mars, and perhaps Mercury which should greatly enhance the survival of the human species in the solar system.

The moon also has some industrial potential since it requires at least 20 times less energy to launch a satellite into Earth's orbit from the lunar surface than from the Earth's surface. Satellites are at the core of the trillion dollar telecommunications industry. So if satellites could eventually be manufactured and launched from the lunar surface then lunar colonies could someday dominate the satellite manufacturing, satellite launching, and perhaps even the satellite repair industry. Tourism and even the burial of human ashes on the Moon could also be potential multi-billion dollar lunar industries in the future.

Unfortunately, NASA's next program, Constellation (a mission currently under review by the Obama administration), is not a lunar base program. Constellation is an Apollo-like sortie program which NASA argues could be a prelude to a lunar base program. Some now argue that a lunar base program should be scrapped altogether.

How difficult would it be to set up a lunar base?

It may be a lot simpler and cheaper than we imagine-- if we let remote controlled robots do all of the hard work even before humans arrive. Just one launch from NASA's future heavy lift vehicle, the Ares V, could place between 15 to 20 tonnes of payload on the lunar surface. So a fully functioning lunar facility capable of accommodating perhaps 10 astronauts at a time for a year or more would probably only require three or four launches of the Ares V-- excluding the manned launches required to bring the astronauts to the lunar surface. Of course the astronauts should be attempting to live off the land as much as possible by manufacturing their own oxygen from the lunar regolith. But the Ares V could launch another 20 tonnes of food and water if they ran short.



Humans require approximately 3 kg of water per day, 2.8 kg of oxygen per day and 1.8 kg of food per day: 2.8 tonnes of water, oxygen, and food for each individual on the moon annually. Obviously, if oxygen and water can be recycled to some degree then supplies would last longer. And if oxygen can be efficiently manufactured from the lunar regolith then oxygen wouldn't have to be imported from Earth at all and only the small hydrogen component of water (11%) would have to be shipped from Earth in order to manufacture H20 on the lunar surface.



To assemble these bases, NASA could use the emerging ATHLETE robot technology. The spider-like ATHLETE robots and other remote controlled vehicles could assemble and properly shield the lunar base with lunar soil. These robots could also travel practically all over the vast lunar surface, thousands of kilometers away from the manned lunar base, collecting rocks and soil samples from different regions of the moon and then returning those samples back to the lunar base for eventual export back to Earth for study.



Just a few billion dollars-- extra-- in annual funding for NASA could accelerate the development of the Ares V and the development of the lunar base and lunar transportation infrastructure so that humans might return to the moon as early as 2016. But this time not to visit, but to stay!


Links and References

NASA may scrap plans for a Permanent Moon Base

Ares V

Constellation Program

ATHLETE ROVER

ATHLETE Robot

Startech Garbage to Energy System

Links and References

Utilizing Renewable Methanol to Power Electric Commuter Aircraft

Deploying Ocean Nuclear Energy Flotillas into International Waters for the Carbon Neutral Production of Synthetic Fuels, Industrial Chemicals, and Fertilizers

Mitigating Forest Fires by Harvesting Potentially Hazardous Woodland Biomass for the Production of Renewable Methanol

 The Case for Remotely Sited Underwater Nuclear Reactors

 Renewable Methanol as Liquid Electricity


 Floating Nuclear Power Plants, Floating Power Barges, and Marine Methanol

 Siting Ocean Nuclear Power Plants in Remote US Territorial Waters for the Carbon Neutral Production of Synfuels and Industrial Chemicals

Hitler's response to Roosevelt

The Nuclear Synfuel Economy

by Marcel F. Williams

Currently, commercial nuclear energy in the US and in the rest of the world is solely utilized for the production of electricity. The 104 commercial nuclear reactors in the US provides nearly 20% of the electricity produced in the United States. But electricity only constitutes about 40% of America's total energy consumption. So even if nuclear power totally supplanted all other electric power generating systems in the US today, nuclear power would still only provide 40% of America's total energy needs. However, the rise of electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEV) over the next few decades could greatly expand the use of electricity in ground transportation vehicles that normally use gasoline.

Petroleum consumption in the US also constitutes approximately 40% of the energy use in the US. America uses nearly 21 million barrels a day of petroleum with nearly 15 million barrels a day utilized for transportation fuel (gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel). But the US currently produces less than 9 million barrels a day of petroleum (the US is still the third largest producers of oil on Earth) and imports more than 12 million barrels a day of petroleum. So the US only produces 43% of its own oil while currently importing more than 57% of the petroleum required for domestic transportation and industrial chemical use.

Chevy Volt PHEV

Gasoline constitutes approximately 61% of the transportation fuel utilized in America. Studies have shown that the use of electricity for PHEVs could potentially displace up to 6.5 million barrels of oil per day, more than half of the imported oil coming to America (31% of total petroleum consumption in the US). Nuclear electricity, therefore, could potentially supplant nearly 31% of US petroleum requirements.

But what about the other 69% of US petroleum needs?

Up to 388 million dry tons a year of urban biowaste, 325 million tons of forest refuse, and 597 million tons of agricultural waste could be exploited from our cities, forest, and current agricultural acreage to produce carbon-neutral biofuels (gasoline, methanol, diesel fuel, and jet fuel), an equivalent of approximately 4 million barrels of oil per day (19% of total US daily petroleum consumption). So the addition of carbon neutral biowaste from urban and rural areas could further reduce US petroleum needs to only 50% of current levels.

Fuel cell methanol vehicle

Methanol fuel cells utilized to power automobiles could be twice as efficient as current automobile engines and could potentially reduce petroleum demand by an additional 3.2 million barrels a day equivalent of oil. That would further reduce daily petroleum needs to just 35% of current levels. Since the US produces 38% of its own petroleum, this would-- in theory-- make the US energy independent from foreign oil. But as the third largest producer of oil on Earth, the US would still remain a major greenhouse gas polluter. Electricity from batteries from plug-in hybrids would provide equivalent cost of only 75 cents per gallon. Fuel cells could also cut the energy cost of methanol in half. So even the highest priced synthetics fuels in the future would probably cost consumers less than they are paying now-- if they drove PHEV-fuel cell automobiles.

The synthesis of biomass into biofuels waste 80% of its carbon content in the form of carbon dioxide. But if hydrogen were added to the mix, biowaste could potentially supply up to 20 million barrels of oil equivalent of biofuels annually. And nuclear power plants could be used to produce hydrogen through the electrolysis of water. However, the extraction of CO2 from the atmosphere may be a more efficient mechanism for supply CO2 for nuclear electrolysis facilities in the long run. So nuclear power in combination with biowaste fuels would not only make the US totally independent of petroleum fuels but would also make the US a major exporter of carbon neutral synfuels.

In a pure nuclear synfuel economy, approximately 1170 nuclear reactors (1100 MWe of capacity each) dedicated for synfuel production, would be required to supply all of the carbon neutral industrial chemical and liquid fuel needs in the US today. However, in a hydrogen-biofuel economy that utilizes urban and rural biowaste in combination with highly efficient automobiles that utilize PHEV and fuel cell technologies, only 410 nuclear reactors dedicated to synfuel production would be required for America to become totally independent from foreign and domestic petroleum fuels, ending greenhouse gas pollution from the petroleum economy in the US-- forever.




References and Links

1. Michael Kintner-Meyer, Kevin Schneider, Robert Pratt IMPACTS ASSESSMENT OF PLUG-IN HYBRID VEHICLES ON ELECTRIC UTILITIES AND REGIONAL U.S. POWER GRIDS PART 1: TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory November, 2007

2. G. Olah, A. Goeppert, and G. Prakash, (2006) Beyond Oil and Gas: The Methanol Economy, Wiley-VCH Verlang, Weinheim, Germany

3. Robert D. Perlack, Lynn L. Wright, Anthony F. Turhollow, Bryce J. Stokes,Donald C. Erbach, Robin L. Graham, (2005)BIOMASS AS FEEDSTOCK FOR A BIOENERGY AND BIOPRODUCTS INDUSTRY: THE TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY OF A BILLION-TON ANNUAL SUPPLY Oak Ridge National Laboratory A Joint Study Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Department of Agriculture

4. Agrawal, R, Singh, N R, Ribeiro, F H , Delgass, W N , (Mar 2007) Sustainable fuel for the transportation sector. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104 (12), p.4828-4833,


5. Green Freedom: A concept for producing carbon-neutral synthetic fuels and chemicals, Los Alamos Labs, November 2007 F.J. Martin and WL Kubic,

6. Gasoline from Air and Water

7. The Plug-in Hybrid Revolution

© Marcel F. Williams
New Papyrus

Those noisy wind turbines again!

References

Back Bay Wind

Industrial Wind Action Group

Stop Ill Wing Organization

In the Year 2525

In the year 2525
If man is still alive
If woman can survive they may find


In the year 3535
Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lies
Everything you think, do and say
Is in the pill you took today

In the year 4545
Ain't gonna need your teeth, won't need your eyes
You won't find a thing to chew
Nobody's gonna look at you

In the year 5555
Your arms hanging limp at your sides
Your legs got nothing to do
Some machine's doing that for you

In the year 6565
Ain't gonna need no husband, won't need no wife
You'll pick your son, pick your daughter too
From the bottom of a long glass tube, whoa-oh

In the year 7510
If God's a-comin' He oughta make it by then
Maybe He'll look around Himself and say
Guess it's time for the judgment day

In the year 8510
God is gonna shake His mighty head
He'll either say I'm pleased where man has been
Or tear it down and start again, whoa-oh

In the year 9595
I'm kinda wonderin' if man is gonna be alive
He's taken everything this old Earth can give
And he ain't put back nothin', whoa-oh

Now it's been ten thousand years
Man has cried a billion tears
For what he never knew
Now man's reign is through

But through eternal night
The twinkling of starlight
So very far away
Maybe it's only yesterday

In the year 2525
If man is still alive
If woman can survive, they may find....