Fwd: ATBTC's CHAIN LETTER 4:

-----Original Message-----
From: b <rrdd3939@aol.com>
To: rrdd3939@aol.com
Sent: Tue, Nov 23, 2010 9:53 pm
Subject: ATBTC's CHAIN LETTER 4:

                               ATBTC (Americans Taken Back Their County)

                                                  CHAIN LETTER 4:

                                          EXPLORATION and ENERGY

                      by Richard DePersio, Joined by Fellow Revolutionaries

        Loose Association of Americans with Similar but Not Cookie-Cutter Views

PROPOSAL 10:
Mining the Moon for Silicon and Helium-3 for the purpose of taking a major step toward

energy independence and generating affordable energy while our demand for energy more

then doubles over the next two decades.

      We have taken many factors into consideration in endorsing these proposals, including,

real climatology as opposed to U.N.-Cattle Fart-Hockey Stick Pseudo-climatology.

      It is extremely expensive and difficult to mine for silicon and Helium-3 on earth. The

price tag might even be prohibitive on a massive scale. Silicon is employed in producing

solar cells for solar panels which we want in earth orbit generating electricity. Helium-3 would

be used for fusion plants to generate electricity. We presently have fission plants. Fusion  plants would be less expensive, even safer and more environmentally-friendly (for the

benefit of Cattle-Farters) then fission plants.

     Let's put the subject in perspective. Coal generates 15-20% as much energy as put

into the energy of mining and processing. Mining on the moon is much less expensive

because of lower gravity and no air resistance. "Mass Drivers" powered by concentrated

sunlight would scrape helium-3 from the surface and the material to earth orbit. It would

cost only 5% to send silicon from moon to earth orbit then it would from earth to earth orbit.

Such mining would retrieve 300x more energy  from He-3 then put in, including, the energy   of going to the moon and shipping material to earth! Cost-effective: So, Why did Obama

cancel moon program? Same reason that he loaned Mexican Oil  to drill in Gulf of

Mexico during moratorium on U.S. drilling, in spite of the fact that they have much lower

safety and environmental standards?

    Don't touch pristine moon. We'll get to it. Hold your farts. 

    It has been estimated that we will have fusion plants by 3030 give or take 3 years. NASA
could truncate it to 2023 give or take 3 years.

PROPOSAL 11:

Not allowing $9 spent on NASA's "Constellation" Program go down same presidential

black hole as "stimulus package" and Fannie/Freddie. Combine Orion/Ares 1 and Ares 5

heavy-lifter with nuclear thermal  stage ( aka earth-transfer module to moon and Mars)  to      be fired  in low or high earth orbit with it doing double-duty as cosmic ray shield for Orion.  Array should include safer liquid booster rockets rather then shuttle solid boosters if necessary. Using nuclear thermal stage would make rocket faster, more powerful and

less expensive. It would also require one or two chemical stages.

PROPOSAL 12: 

We should have 5 moon missions lasting 3 weeks at lunar equatorial region, mission to

lunar 'arctic' region for 5 weeks, flight to lunar 'antarctic' circle for 7 weeks, visit to lunar

far side for 4 weeks with comsat in Lagrange orbit and a return to lunar north for 3 months

during 2020-21. Four follow-up missions if warranted.

     NASA would establish 3 moon bases where astronauts (Commander, pilot, mission

specialists - geologists, geophysicists, engineers, astronomers) for stays of up to 3 months

with private company geologists, geophysicists, metallurgists, engineers nearby. They

would pay NASA to be flown to moon or pay private company. They might be able to

use water at poles to drink, separate out O to breath and the H for nuclear thermal power

plant and for propulsion. Living off the land. Mining can't commence until area is

thoroughly studied scientifically. During that period, private company can determine

viability of site for mining. In the future, private company would be compelled to do

exploration prior to exploitation without NASA (Pure science often leads to applied science

or technology).

Proposals 10, 11 and 12 might enable us to have fusion plants on earth by 2023 give or

take 3 years and we should begin orbiting solar energy satellites when the new version Ares   is operational which should be by or before 2017. Experts estimate that we can only get

up to 30% of our energy from solar and wind. NASA could guarantee it! Since NASA's

inception it has developed cutting-edge technology and built upon existing technology

which has made its way to the private sector - free of charge! - after 3 to 5 years.

NASA paving the way.Only 1/2 of one per cent of fed budget. Only component of fed gov

where you get a return: $5 return for every $1 invested in 5 years or less: pure science

and applied science or technology; spin-offs or applications.