New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.

fredmoore - 06:34pm Aug 9, 2003 EST (# 13277 of 13280)

Robert,

"Not feasible? When I went to the Patent Office monday - I got the opposite impression - and if Fredmoore had been there, he might have as well. I know I would have been proud to have him examine the material there - I think the Patent Office, in its stark way, is an inspiring place. I think, with the stakes as they are there would be a duty to check."

Back in the early nineties I spent several weeks in the Sydney patent office researching whether my idea for using dynamic geometries for fuel cell electrolytes (F.B.I.) was conceptually unique. It certainly was and I filed for a patent based on that concept and including the laser printer style of geometry which I have presented many times on this and the Future Energy forums. I found the process of researching a concept, lodging a patent and the entire PO milieu excting, stimulating and inspiring. I certainly would have liked to have the time to spend with you examining applications centred around towed equatorial arrays. In fact I will endeavour to access the Sydney PO online and get back to you.

As for my being too cynical,

1. Modern corporate states are incontrovertably linked to fossil fuel empires around the globe. Any technology which challenges that status quo will not be allowed to reach full fruition till an emergency situation presents itself and the status quo is aware for the need to make changes. This is only human nature, a kind of Fermat's principle of economic and social 'least action'. The emergency conditions such as terrorism and dwindling US domestic oil supplies are extant but are not yet deemed to be terminally threatening enough for the status quo to change. It's all about lifestyles of the rich, famous and dynastic. These guys have thrown the dice, come up winners and intend to bask in the glory. They have governments and media empires at their disposal to ensure this goal is met with as little interference from the public as is possible. What's more it is a system or status quo which works and has given the world much prosperity.

2. The PV towed arrays would be an enormous capital investment ... $billions. One large squall or one short sharp tsunami travelling at 100kmh or more, could blow that investment in a matter of seconds. The oceans are a SINK for all the high entropy on the planet. The solstace doldrums would have to be sufficiently immune from chaotic oceanic disturbances to better than a one in 10 year event. If the MTBF (mean time before failure) of the array was less than 10 years the capital investment could not be sustained. Could you or anyone guarantee a less than 10 year MTBF? I don't think so.

I am just being realistic about both issues. Historically speaking, in all Empires, energy stocks, money and Leviathans make the world go round ... at least till the empire collapses due to an inextricable build up of its own high entropy wastes and consequences. Further, if the current status quo (empire) wishes to avoid that collapse in a win-win fashion for both itself and all global citizens, they should look very carefully at the KAEP option I have outlined.

One other thing, I would like you to consider the following distributive rather than centralised alternative to the towed PV array concept:

Assume that with research, we can mass produce a thermoelectric fabric 6metres by 2metres with an inbuilt 120volt converter. Assume that it will operate on as little as 20 degC thermal differentials. Further assume that such a device can generate 1kW in direct sunlight, provide shade for crops and collect fresh water from condensation on a specially grooved underside. If a price of say US$200 -500 could be achieved, how many do you think you as the manufacturer could sell? What impact do you think this would make on the global economy and on the environmental sustainability of human activities across the planet?

(3 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense