XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics   
   From: invalid@invalid.com   
      
   On 10/17/2016 8:09 PM, Fred J. McCall wrote:   
   > Serigo  wrote:   
   >   
   >> 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 ?   
   >>   
   >   
   > Yeah.  He had no point.   
      
   you are unable to think outside your very limited small teeny-tiny box.   
      
   you still missed it.   
   you dont have much on this topic do you?   
      
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> For extra Credit list the problems,   
   >> (hint, there are 8 major problems)   
   >>   
   >   
   > You don't get credit for listing problems, idiot.   
      
   problems are solved by engineering,   
   you do not even have the depth to list the obvious 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.   
   >>   
   >   
   > DOE is building them now.   
      
   no they are not.  They are funding studies.  got a URL ?   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> and WHY ?   to collect rocks on Mars ?   For Geology ?   
   >>   
   >>             f*ck that !!   
   >>   
   >   
   > I love how you make up the answers for other people.   
      
   wrong again. it is => THE ANSWER for MARS.   
      
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> take that 16 Billion and give Jobs to people in the USA building   
   >> factories here.   
   >>   
   >   
   > That won't help you.   
      
   you keep insulting people, instead of providing solutions, here is a   
   HUGE political problem, and all you have is SNOT .   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)