Re: starship-design: Space Elevators Maybe Closer To Reality Than Imagined

[KellySt@aol.com]

In a message dated 8/1/03 5:18:44 PM, lparker@cacaphony.net writes:

>On Fri, 2003-08-01 at 19:03, KellySt@aol.com wrote:
>
>> A couple things that always bothered me about space elevators.
>> 
>
>[clip]
>
>The author addressed all most of those concerns in the article. Whether
>it was enve practical or not was the primary issue until now, followed
>by cost. Apparently, a lot has changed in the last ten years. They now
>seem to be eminently practical and getting cheaper every day.
>
>If they can be built at all, they are a sure thing to be cheaper and
>safer than ANY current launch system. Short of the invention of
>anti-gravity that is...
>
>Lee


Hard to say.  Current tech with a large market could drop costs to $s per 
pound of cargo to orbit.  A teather might be cheaper -- or might be more 
expensive.  A teathers overhead and maint expenses could well be far more.

Teather advocates love to quote the stats that "energy costs" to orbit would 
only be pennies per pound of cargo.  But the energy costs of conventional 
launchers is little more -- and a trivial fraction of actual costs.