RE: [FT] Debris Reef Harbour [LONG]

Well, your first post regarding the transport cost did have the word
"prohibitive" in it... :)

[QUOTE]
Not sure if your intending that it has to be 'all of the above', but I
would, as it seems to me that it would take a heck of a lot of
transport,
as in prohibitive, to move that much material any appreciable distance.
Remember, in reality, you're talking about a sphere, though the spirals
are
in two dimensions.
[QUOTE]

My argument was that it's not prohibitive, as long as you have the time.
And that the distance factor was moot since your only real energy cost
is starting the stuff moving and stopping it at the end, not how far it
travels. 

Now if you needed this up in a year or something, then the transport
cost probably would be prohibitive.

--Binhan

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Evans [mailto:devans@nebraska.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 11:09 AM
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: RE: [FT] Debris Reef Harbour [LONG]

>I would think the debris harbor would be a major construct that
governments would be willing to invest years or >decades developing

Er, I thought my point WAS that it would be a major effort, even
attempted
on the cheap, long term. ;->=

However, I'll admit you won't need each transport 'unit' in place for
the
complete trip. I'm an old fan of BattleFleet Mars, remember.

>Whether or not it fulfilled it's protective purpose is a different
point.

My impression is the that the Great Wall did a damn fine job. Perfect?
No.

The_Beast