The case for it is made by compelling evidence.
Of course, the evidence is compelling only to those interested in actual results, as opposed to running other peoples’ lives.
The case for it is made by compelling evidence.
Of course, the evidence is compelling only to those interested in actual results, as opposed to running other peoples’ lives.
Another green (and Obama) fantasy, goes up in smoke. I do think there will be a huge move toward natural-gas vehicles, though, with the new cheap supplies from fracking.
[Update on Sunday]
Funny thing. Electric cars depreciate much faster than conventional ones. Huh.
Along with the rest of the Middle East. I guess this is that “smart diplomacy” I’ve been hearing so much about.
[Update a few minutes later]
Wrong link, fixed now. Sorry.
No, working a forty-hour week should not guarantee you a middle-class lifestyle. To think it should is Marxism, whether you realize it or not.
For the record, I have no desire to do any of these things, with the possible exception of number ten.
OK, until I get my problems with Amazon resolved, I’m selling them there myself, at two bucks off list. I’ve got books, I’ve got mailers, it’s dumb to not be selling books. Should I be selling signed editions for a premium? How much demand for that?
Paul Spudis wonders what might have been for the VSE. My biggest problem with it is this:
Ten years ago, we took a critical turn on the road to our future in space. We now have a reliable, sustainable launch system based on Shuttle hardware. We have no need to pay foreign countries to carry our crews into orbit.
Any launch system based on Shuttle hardware is not going to be sustainable, because it has too high a fixed operating cost. Also, there is no explanation of how our crews are getting into orbit. The only thing he talks about in terms of US launch capability is this:
As Shuttle was completing its final ISS missions, the reliable Shuttle hardware was simultaneously being developed into the new Neptune launch vehicle – an affordable Shuttle side-mount rocket that we now depend on to regularly and reliably supply our space efforts. This heavy lift vehicle, with almost 80 metric tons of capacity, has proven to be more than adequate in supplying the needs of lunar return. Since Neptune was developed entirely with existing Shuttle pieces, we were able to use the manufacturing facilities at Michoud and the vehicle-processing infrastructure at the Cape without making significant modifications. More than any other early effort of the VSE, the development of Shuttle side-mount Neptune (versus the development of a wholly new launch system) was the key decision that advanced our return to the Moon. Because Neptune was developed in parallel with the completion and retirement of the Space Shuttle, we experienced an interval of less than a year when our civil program could not send people into space.
But the link doesn’t say anything about “Neptune,” and there is no discussion of how crew gets to orbit. On Neptune? In what crew module? And does that mean you have to launch eighty tons every time you want to launch a crew? The only discussion of a “Neptune” rocket I can find is the proposal by Interorbital Systems, which certainly isn’t Shuttle derived. Why no mention of EELV? Or SpaceX? Or commercial cargo and crew?
So I find the piece a real head scratcher.
For those wondering, the book hasn’t been available at Amazon due to a miscommunication between me and the printer. I hope it’s fixed today or tomorrow.
[Update on Friday]
Well, my hope hasn’t borne out. Now it’s a communications problem between Amazon and the printer. At this point, I hope it’s fixed within the next week. What a mess.
[Bumped]
…will never end.
Both sides seem pretty entrenched.
Sarah Palin’s latest atrocity: Having a Christmas tree.