XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics   
   From: invalid@invalid.com   
      
   On 10/17/2016 8:47 AM, Fred J. McCall wrote:   
   > jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >> As high efficiency solar panel on Mars would only deliver a daily average   
   >> of about 40 W/m^2, low efficieny panels means a LOT of panels.   
   >>   
   >   
   > You have a point?   
      
   yes he does, and you missed it.   
      
   low light = lots of panels => even more problems   
      
   got it ?   
      
   For extra Credit list the problems,   
   (hint, there are 8 major problems)   
      
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> Making solar panel silicon is very energy intensive, so how do you   
   >> bootstrap a solar panel plant other than with a reactor or shipping   
   >> huge amounts of panels, mounting hardware, and cement for the posts?   
   >>   
   >   
   > Initial power would come   
   > from a number of relatively small nuclear reactors.  The first two   
   > down would provide power for a chemical plant making methane and   
   > 'hotel power' for an initial habitat.  These are relatively small   
   > reactors, so having lots of them with each assigned to a specific   
   > application is not a major problem.   
      
   you're in dreamland again...  Nothing real, none of that exists.   
      
   and WHY ?   to collect rocks on Mars ?   For Geology ?   
      
                f*ck that !!   
      
   take that 16 Billion and give Jobs to people in the USA building   
   factories here.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)