NationStates Jolt Archive

I proposed a motion to fund an international project to build a space elevator, which would significantly slash the cost of launches that are increasingly part of our economy and scientific progress, as well as providing a framework for other large-scale international projects (not necessarily space-based ones) and providing advances in engineering and materials technology.

Further to this proposal, I'd like to open the motion for discussion. NASA has deemed the project feasible with the correct planning and research into changes in materials technology, etc, within the next 50 years or so. Its report can be viewed here:
http://flightprojects.msfc.nasa.gov/pdf_files/elevator.pdf

Further references can be found at http://www.spaceelevator.com, a hub for articles on the matter.

If you're going to ask for support for a proposal in the forum, it's nice to post the proposal's actual text as well.
Space Elevator Construction

A resolution to reduce barriers to free trade and commerce.
*

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Bixxaver

Description: As the global economy becomes increasingly reliant on orbital launches, with aerospace contractors and scientific institutions benefitting immensely from projects based in space, as well as ground observation and communications satellites providing a variety of civilian and military benefits, it is important to have easy access to Earth orbit and beyond.

Recent advances in space engineering, computer technology and materials science have rendered possible a device proposed in the last century that would revolutionise space travel by slashing the cost of launches. The Space Elevator, put simply, is an elevator that allows men and materials to travel into Earth orbit without using vast amounts of resources to do so.

The following benefits are apparent:
- Economic; by slashing the cost of launches, communications and other satellites would cost less to launch and hence revolutionise the communications and entertainment industry.
- Environmental; by removing the necessity for large amounts of kerosene or similar to be expended in costly single-use launch vehicles.
- Security; military satellites could be launched more cheaply, enabling terrorism and other threats to be countered more easily from orbital monitoring.
- Scientific; costly scientific probes and manned missions could be more easily made real by this project, leading to tangible benefits in science and technology as well spill-over benefits to industry.
- Progress; a stairway to heaven could help propel mankind to other planets, paving the way for a civilisation less reliant on one fragile planet for its survival.

The main downside is cost; the cable would have to be 35,000 km long and while technically possible, it would be expensive to build.
Hence international cooperation is required to make this a reality. The nations that contribute the most relative to their GNP or similar income measure could command a greater share of profits, ensuring a return on investments in the long-term.

As space travel is becoming more commercial, with the X-Prize within reach of private investors, the world needs a cheap and easy way to expand into orbit and beyond; the space elevator is currently the only viable alternative to rocket launches, which are expensive, dangerous and environmentally damaging in the long-term.

Now, as I understand it, we already have a UN space authority, and this'd fall under their remit. Since it already has fairly sizable commitments, and a limited number of investors, it'd be unreasonable to demand more of them without a substantial growth in their membership - which I'm not sure will be forthcoming.

Also, why does every frickin' proposal have to work out some way, no matter how tenuous and extended, in which their proposal will stop terrorism?

It's called marketing. Terrorism = money from the big players. ;)

The Space Elevator as it stands would represent a major investment, and it seems that, along with the commercial applications, it would need separate backing from its investors (i.e. the governments in the UN).

Oh, and thanks for posting the proposal text. I'll bear that in mind next time.

It's called marketing. Terrorism = money from the big players. ;)

Until they become the - Nation States - "Big Players".

The the rational ones.

The ones who get really ping'd by that line of thought. :wink:

Terrorism = Money From The Sheep !
:wink:

- Le Représentant de Komokom.

Ministre Régional de Substance.
L'Ordre de Vaillant États.
http://www.nationstates.net/images/flags/uploads/komokom.jpg (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/24401/page=display_nation)
Aspirez a la legalite avec l'egalite

<--- Not a Moderator, just a Know It All.

Seriously, though, it's not a security proposal, so it won't have any in-game effect on terrorism. It will improve the economy in terms of satellite communications and other orbital investments, however.

NASA has deemed the project feasible with the correct planning and research into changes in materials technology, etc, within the next 50 years or so.

What NASA actually said was
The Earth to GEO elevator is not feasible today, but could be an important concept for the future development of space in the latter part of the 21st century.

(Emphasis mine). Or, to put it another way, don't expect us to have the technology needed to put this into place until 2150 or perhaps later.

So, unless we're godmodding with future tech, this bit:
Recent advances in space engineering, computer technology and materials science have rendered possible a device proposed in the last century that would revolutionise space travel by slashing the cost of launches.
is false.

It seems that what you're doing here is putting the cart several miles in front of the horse. The document you referenced has recommendations with regard to how technology should be directed in order to make such an elevator feasible, and even suggestions of baby-step advancements in implementing this technology - none of which you mention. In order to make your proposal more realistic, it would be wise to change the emphasis onto working to develop technology with an end in sight, rather than phrase it as if we can start laying the foundations tomorrow.

Kamquin Dakar
Ministry of Trade and Industry

What about wind resistance?

I'm going to side with the "way too far in the future, Tex" camp here. While its nice to play sci-fi every now and then, this UN, as far as I know, is planted solidly in the now. That said, the closest we could come to a space elevator is maybe a really, really, tall ladder. Perhaps you could make a resolution supporting the development of space elevator technologies, but this is a bit much.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

What about wind resistance?

I'm not yet persuaded of the need to go into great detail here*; however, the problem of wind resistance is not an insurmountable one.

This is definitely a worthy project and one that a number of Ecopoeia's materials scientists are researching. However, the time for it is, sadly, not yet nigh.

Sax Russell
Speaker for Science

*OOC: I haven't got time!

Hmmm, a giant tower sticking out of the atmosphere into space... Chances of it lasting long are slim... besides, which nation would it spring from?

Bagsie mine!.

Desdemona,
UN representative,
The Black New World
Do you know what ‘gay science’ is?

I don't know Bixxaver. Seems a little out there, no pun intended.
While the long term benefits are sizable, the short term costs and the vulnerability of the project to natural and man made disasters is too great.

Bagsie mine!.
Well, you'd have to be on the equator...

But yeah, this raises an important point: any nation in which the thing was situated would get a pretty immense trade boost both during construction and once it was done. Not that this is particularly relevant given what's already been said.

It could be placed in international waters, thus negating any huge advantage to any one nation.

OK, in retrospect it seems that the timescale is perhaps twice that I'd suggested for its completion, but it's important to have the kind of international framework for such a project in place so as to enable its completion more quickly once such materials that are needed are more readily available on a mass-produced scale.

Technically, we have a fairly good idea of how to build one, but as has been suggested, it'd need a lot of discussion on an international scale into the details of its ramifications and safety measures before it would become possible to begin construction; this in itself represents a need for at least partial commitment by member states to the eventual goal, andin itself may allow some economic benefits in supporting companies involved in such industries as may be involved in its construction. A little backpedalling, maybe, but it will happen all the sooner if we're ready for it in terms of what can be achieved today.

If plans for a space elevator are in motion, allow us, The Fiefdom of Brairsfield, to aid in the theory and engineering behind the project. Our nation will bring interesting and innovative concepts to the table with the proper theoretical and experimental support. We boast advanced mathematics and science research teams and facilities that can be utilized in a moment's notice to suit the needs of the project.

Reply if one wishes to implore our nations expertise in theoretical and mathematical physics to upgrade the scientific status of the world.

If you're willing to put funds into the research of large-scale production of suitable carbon nano-fibres or other related technologies, then it will be useful. However, maybe waiting until the resolution has passed would be wise, as investing money in a project that will never occur is possibly unwise.

Fire?
Sabotage?
Scouring winds?
Wouldn't scheduled maintenance be dangerous and expensive?

It could be placed in international waters, thus negating any huge advantage to any one nation.
I bagsied it, it is mine.

Desdemona,
UN representative,
The Black New World
Do you know what ‘gay science’ is?

Fire?
Sabotage?
Scouring winds?
Wouldn't scheduled maintenance be dangerous and expensive?

OOC: Sorry I can't be more helpful at the moment, but if you Google 'space elevator' there's a whole load of sites with info on the subject. As far as I'm aware, it could work, but we don't have the materials sciences advances to attempt such an undertaking yet.

DP

Wouldn't you need two elevators, to rescue folk when one got stuck?

And stairs in case there was a fire?

Desdemona,
UN representative,
The Black New World
Do you know what ‘gay science’ is?

Presumably there's the same wind as anywhere on Earth's surface; it's geostationary, so you'd only have the same wind as a plane, say (if that plane wasn't moving sideways).

As for fire or sabotage, a mixture of suitable escape procedures and security measures should do the trick. You could have heat shielding on the car that allowed it to reenter and make a splashdown if necessary (another advantage of building on water).

(another advantage of building on water).Look we're not building it on water, I bagsied it. If you ask nicely thought I'll let you build it on one of my beaches or lakes if I'm feeling really generous.

Desdemona,
UN representative,
The Black New World
Do you know what ‘gay science’ is?
Meet The Reps (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=132588)

:( It will cost alot of money and ruin the enviroment if built in the ocean!

Presumably there's the same wind as anywhere on Earth's surface; it's geostationary, so you'd only have the same wind as a plane, say (if that plane wasn't moving sideways).

As for fire or sabotage, a mixture of suitable escape procedures and security measures should do the trick. You could have heat shielding on the car that allowed it to reenter and make a splashdown if necessary (another advantage of building on water).

Here's a good article about why high altitude winds at the equator are the fastest of all winds.

Poses a peroblem, I deem.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askasci/1995/environ/ENV029.HTM