Jump to content
DHGCARBON

Space Elevators 2014

Recommended Posts

I know in the Big Affs topic there has been a lot of talk about space elavators. Well it's getting pretty big. So I deceided to start a thread solely talking about space elevators. This is the place for everything having to do with them. Post all your ideas, cards, potential advantages, T arguments, DAs and CPs and anything else. I will update it with cards I have. Thanks to all who posted cards in the big affs thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would one implement a SPS Advantage for a Space Elevator Aff?

 

 

 

Space Elevator solves SPS

 

Riatt and Edwards 4 - * Senior Technology Transfer Officer, Technology Transfer & Promotion Office, European Space Agency and **President, X Tech Corp  (David and Bradley, 2004, "The Space Elevator: Economics And Applications," IAC-04-IAA.3.8.3, 55th International Astronautical Congress 2004 - Vancouver, Canada, http://www.spaceelevator.com/Docs/Iac-2004/Iac-04-iaa.3.8.3.09.raitt.pdf)#SPS

 

 

 

One major use envisioned at the outset is that of launching solar energy platforms which will collect the limitless energy of the sun and beam it down to Earth for a constant source of clean, renewable power. This would have enormous implications for the environment and sustainable development by cutting fossil fuel consumption and thus eliminating harmful greenhouse gases. It would also avoid the necessity of constructing tall solar towers which, of necessity, have huge ground footprints. The solar tower under development in Australia, for instance, will have a collector nearly 6km in diameter and require over 50 square kilometers for the construction. Current costs put the capital investment needed for a space solar power system well in the tens of billions of dollars. Such systems would be able to supply power at approximately $0.2/kW-hr which is still above conventional power production rates of competitive terrestrial options such as fission plants and wind turbines. The major hurdle has been the launch costs required to place 20 million kilo systems at geosynchronous altitude. Conventional rocket systems can place 5000kg in geosynchronous for roughly $200m (Atlas V or Delta IV). This would place the total launch costs at $800bn. However, recent work suggests that these costs would drop with the Space Elevator. Total launch costs would be around $30bn and allow for roughly $0.1$/kW-hr power production. This is competitive with terrestrial-based power supplies. More R&D work is needed to bring the technology to maturity for such a programme but countries such as Japan have stated a commitment to construct a space solar power system by 2040.

 

 

 

Solve solar power and disaster response

 

Kent 07 -  Major, USAF, PE (Jason, Center for Strategy and Technology, Air War College. "Getting To Space On A Thread, Space Elevator As Alternative Space Access" April 2007)#SPS 

 

 

 

Building a space elevator suddenly makes many projects feasible which would have direct application to support the U.S. military. Power generation from orbit and on-call night- time illumination are but two of these missions. Solar power is a free and inexhaustible energy supply. Using a space elevator, massive solar power collection and transmission stations could be constructed in GEO that could relieve and someday replace fossil fuel-based energy production. For the military, such stations could be developed to beam power down to fielded forces relieving these units from the need to bring fuel or generators into an undeveloped area of operations. Similarly, on-call illumination from either mirrors or spotlights in orbit could be built to support military operations or emergency response. These satellites would prove very useful in illuminating targeted areas or exposing enemy positions while leaving friendly forces shielded by darkness. In an emergency response situation, the same orbital illumination could be used to provide light while terrestrial power was restored or response personnel were in action. With a space elevator, legacy missions would grow while new missions are enabled. With these missions in mind, it is time to turn to the actual construction and operation of a space elevator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

space elevators are definitely a line of flight

 

edit: you could definitely make a kritikal argument with these on like really excessive spending -- transpo topic had stuff on this, i'm gonna go look

 

 

 

A SPACE ELEVATOR WOULD BE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN ANYTHING BUILT BEFORE it-the cost of the pyramids, the collesuem, andTHE COLOSSUS all pale in comparison

Christopher J. Kobus2009, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Oakland University, Wednesday, January 21, “Elevating ourselves into outer space!†theblogprof,http://bit.ly/muLkHm
Being a sci-fi fan, long… vacations in space stations!

space is key to break out of the cycle of the restricted economics of Earth—the only way that capitalist growth can be spent is either on making weapons or the glorious expenditure of space projects

Neal Curtis2006, Lecturer in Critical Theory, University of Nottingham, War and Social Theory World, Value and Identity, 74-79
Economy (general versus restricted) In 1939, the year that the persistent…. of declaring a close to the course of history.

We must replace our notion of restricted economic systems ruled by scarcity with a broader notion of the general economy, where excess and expenditure are the prime drivers—failure to break out into the general economy will lead to nuclear war and massive ecological destruction

Allan Stoekl2007, professor of French and comparative literature at Penn State University, Bataille’s Peak: Energy, Religion, and Postsustainability, 36-38 [THIS CARD IS GENDER MODIFIED]
Bataille’s Version of Expenditure The Accursed Share, first published in 1949, has had…. and downsizing rather than glorious excess?

And, space solves the transition to a general economy best—glorious expenditure on the space elevator will refract back down to earth, creating novel and creative relations to our economic conditions on earth

Astrid Schwarz and Alfred Nordmann2010, Institut für Philosophie, Technische Universität Darmstadt and Department of Philosophy, Darmstadt Technical University, “The Political Economy of Technoscience,†Science in the Context of Application, Ed. Nordmann and Carrier, p. 330-334
Exceeding the Limits to Growth We have seen that feedback…. renewable and an unlimited source of novelty.

Space travel creates a paradigm shift in scientific thought—it shifts us away from the traditional views of scarcity and restricted economy by requiring new modes of knowledge production

Astrid Schwarz and Alfred Nordmann2010, Institut für Philosophie, Technische Universität Darmstadt and Department of Philosophy, Darmstadt Technical University, “The Political Economy of Technoscience,†Science in the Context of Application, Ed. Nordmann and Carrier, p. 322-330 [THIS CARD IS GENDER MODIFIED]
The Blue Planet – an Ambivalent Icon The very first photographs…. such as “space biology†or “cabin ecology.â€23

Edited by georgebushsdogpaintings
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

space elevators are definitely a line of flight

 

edit: you could definitely make a kritikal argument with these on like really excessive spending -- transpo topic had stuff on this, i'm gonna go look

 

 

 

A SPACE ELEVATOR WOULD BE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN ANYTHING BUILT BEFORE it-the cost of the pyramids, the collesuem, andTHE COLOSSUS all pale in comparison[/size]Christopher J. [/size]Kobus, [/size]2009, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Oakland University, Wednesday, January 21, “Elevating ourselves into outer space!†theblogprof,[/size]http://bit.ly/muLkHmBeing a sci-fi fan, long… vacations in space stations![/size]space is key to break out of the cycle of the restricted economics of Earth—the only way that capitalist growth can be spent is either on making weapons or the glorious expenditure of space projects[/size]Neal [/size]Curtis, [/size]2006, Lecturer in Critical Theory, University of Nottingham, War and Social Theory World, Value and Identity, 74-79[/size]Economy (general versus restricted) In 1939, the year that the persistent…. of declaring a close to the course of history.[/size]We must replace our notion of restricted economic systems ruled by scarcity with a broader notion of the general economy, where excess and expenditure are the prime drivers—failure to break out into the general economy will lead to nuclear war and massive ecological destruction[/size]Allan [/size]Stoekl, [/size]2007, professor of French and comparative literature at Penn State University, Bataille’s Peak: Energy, Religion, and Postsustainability, 36-38 [THIS CARD IS GENDER MODIFIED][/size]Bataille’s Version of Expenditure The Accursed Share, first published in 1949, has had…. and downsizing rather than glorious excess?[/size]And, space solves the transition to a general economy best—glorious expenditure on the space elevator will refract back down to earth, creating novel and creative relations to our economic conditions on earth[/size]Astrid [/size]Schwarz and Alfred [/size]Nordmann, [/size]2010, Institut für Philosophie, Technische Universität Darmstadt and Department of Philosophy, Darmstadt Technical University, “The Political Economy of Technoscience,†Science in the Context of Application, Ed. Nordmann and Carrier, p. 330-334[/size]Exceeding the Limits to Growth We have seen that feedback….[/size] renewable and an unlimited source of novelty.[/size]Space travel creates a paradigm shift in scientific thought—it shifts us away from the traditional views of scarcity and restricted economy by requiring new modes of knowledge production[/size]Astrid [/size]Schwarz and Alfred [/size]Nordmann, [/size]2010, Institut für Philosophie, Technische Universität Darmstadt and Department of Philosophy, Darmstadt Technical University, “The Political Economy of Technoscience,†Science in the Context of Application, Ed. Nordmann and Carrier, p. 322-330 [THIS CARD IS GENDER MODIFIED][/size]The Blue Planet – an Ambivalent Icon [/size]The very first photographs…. [/size]such as “space biology†or “cabin ecology.â€23[/size]

My plan is at about $400B right now, so I don't think an extra 20 will hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you plan on running this what is your specific plan text to make it T. I'm a novice so I don't know how to word it to avoid troubles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the united states federal government should substantially increase its non-military development of the Earth's oceans by building an ocean-tethered space elevator.

or, with the k adv: usfg lalala by excessively and wastefully investing in the building of an ocean-tethered space elevator

Edited by georgebushsdogpaintings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was also wondering how to respond to unfeasible. My coach gets mad whenever I bring them up and just says carbon nanotubes are not developed enough to build a space elevator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fiat lol

Does that apply? Lol I don't really have a good understanding of concepts.

EDIT: I was also told it only applied to political feasibility.

Edited by DHGCARBON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter whether the space elevator gets built, the process of spending money to build a space elevator solves your advantages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter whether the space elevator gets built, the process of spending money to build a space elevator solves your advantages.

How does that work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does that work?

Its an argument whose simpler version is "being wasteful good". Why that's true is complicated, but accepting that as true - wasteful spending good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advice to anyone planning to run Space Elevators:

 

Be able to answer Extra-T

 

 

The development may begin in the ocean, but 99%+ of the actual development/construction takes place above the waves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With no viable material to hold the weight...how do you ever access your advantages?

 

you can't fiat the creation of something that doesn't exist.

Carbon Nanotubes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an space elevator aff i'd be willing to trade over pm. It's a short 1ac for class, it's solvency and 2 advantages.

 

Two problems in general if your thinking of running it for next years topic:

No viable way to actually build it, the nanotubes just aren't there like they've said above.

And inherency, as soon as the tubes are there, privates will start the building. A Japanese company just announced this month it is building a SpElv. within 50 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carbon Nanotubes

From what I have read, they haven't actually manufactured nanotubes in a length longer than a meter or so...even then...they aren't sure that the nanotubes could hold the weight.

 

Again, you can't fiat the ability to go from one meter of nanotube to a 22,000 mile long nanotube.

 

if the tech doesn't exist.....it doesn't exist. I fail to see how this plan doesnt get decimated everytime someone brings it up?

Edited by NewLDDebater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have read, they haven't actually manufactured nanotubes in a length longer than a meter or so...even then...they aren't sure that the nanotubes could hold the weight.

 

Again, you can't fiat the ability to go from one meter of nanotube to a 22,000 mile long nanotube.

 

if the tech doesn't exist.....it doesn't exist. I fail to see how this plan doesnt get decimated everytime someone brings it up?

 

Modern policy debate has de-emphasized detail-oriented argumentation about solvency issues, which is a shame.  I agree, the burden is on the aff to prove this plan is even feasible, and a solvency attack on lack of viable materials could capture my ballot.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have read, they haven't actually manufactured nanotubes in a length longer than a meter or so...even then...they aren't sure that the nanotubes could hold the weight.

Again, you can't fiat the ability to go from one meter of nanotube to a 22,000 mile long nanotube.

if the tech doesn't exist.....it doesn't exist. I fail to see how this plan doesnt get decimated everytime someone brings it up?

A lot of the writing on nanotubes have been in places like popular science, places that are obsessed with futurism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read an actual nanotech aff if you're going to read anything "nano". Also, SpElv sounds like a terrible idea. Honestly... there's a few couple of years worth of evidence to show it's bad and you don't even really develop the ocean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...