tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post7681452159115997197..comments2024-03-19T00:19:09.117-07:00Comments on Rocketpunk Manifesto: Economic Bubbles in SPAAACE !!!Rickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-85405658966581721792015-11-17T19:05:17.141-08:002015-11-17T19:05:17.141-08:00I'll just note that there is element of space ...I'll just note that there is element of space bubble to the series of books by Eric Flint & Ryk E. Spoor that starts with _Boundary_.<br /><br />So far I have only read the 1st 2Jim Baergnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-77762640107681546702011-06-21T07:00:34.489-07:002011-06-21T07:00:34.489-07:00From the spam post to this thread:
All and sundr...From the spam post to this thread: <br /><br /><i>All and sundry knows that the people riding on the backseat in hack oftentimes allow themselves to move away true insubordinate if that the cab driver doesn’t descry them. Splendidly, what would you mark of a hansom cab equipped with a agent cam aimed entirely at the backseat? There is joined taxi cruising the hamlet like that – the ride getting filmed for Taxi Shadow Video! </i><br /><br />Now I know what it would look like if Cylon hybrids wrote erotica. loljollyreaperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05673007647719726846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-38189807891856706852011-04-19T14:18:44.098-07:002011-04-19T14:18:44.098-07:00792515792515Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-33146687020351803502011-02-03T04:39:39.274-08:002011-02-03T04:39:39.274-08:0018777.....8982418777.....89824Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-10082257492519042412011-01-18T03:10:48.261-08:002011-01-18T03:10:48.261-08:0060485.....8945760485.....89457Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-72001779849894194882010-11-30T11:29:20.665-08:002010-11-30T11:29:20.665-08:00Unmanned belt mining is just the start of this pro...Unmanned belt mining is just the start of this problem. If you think about where AI's would realistically progress past the mid-future and the complexity of spaceships, the logical end point would be something along the lines of the Culture. Their ships are run by AI's, have no need for a human crew, baseline humans are just kind of like pets. <br /><br />So you might ask the question of why people would want to remain baseline humans. It gets down to the question of whether or not one can expand a living mind or whether the very process of growth and change would involve the destruction of what once was. <br /><br />Gets me back to a famous old quote, "the adult is the corpse of childhood." Despite what developmental psychologists say about our basic personalities being set by the time we're five and not really changing, there are real differences psychologically between our child selves and our adult selves. A loss of innocence, a loss of wonder, a growing appreciation for the inability of our dreams to be made reality. And to a parent watching the child grow, the sweet young child may as well have died when contemplating the angry, hostile teenager now living in that same room. <br /><br />Perhaps some baseline humans wouldn't want to upgrade the mind for fear of losing personal identity. The Orion's Arm setting posits that there's a whole spectrum of human-based life ranging from those who deliberately embrace paleolithic living to those trying to replicate a rustic farm life with a few modern medical amenities all the way up to people who were born as baseline humans and wanted to grow into AI gods. <br /><br />But both settings, the Culture and Orion's Arm, they're clearly in the realm of Clarketech.jollyreaperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05673007647719726846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-83634016920809913372010-11-29T12:52:17.738-08:002010-11-29T12:52:17.738-08:00Well, that is a really big question. The history o...Well, that is a really big question. The history of space travel so far is that robotic systems can do all the jobs Clarke assumed would require a space station crew. <br /><br />Really, at this point there is no strictly practical reason to send people into space except to learn how to live and work in space Which is a bit circular, but presumes we'll eventually be doing more.<br /><br />But I really don't see reason to send people into deep space just to run mining operations. Surely we can develop expert systems that can handle a round trip time lag on order of an hour, typical of the asteroid belt.Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-92179400361925082672010-11-29T08:31:05.377-08:002010-11-29T08:31:05.377-08:00on-SITE. *facepalm*on-SITE. *facepalm*jollyreaperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05673007647719726846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-72096014152454158032010-11-29T08:02:36.696-08:002010-11-29T08:02:36.696-08:00A lot of that is in human mass - Consumables for l...<i>A lot of that is in human mass - Consumables for life support, workers shuttling to and from home to space, government inspectors, accountants, etc. But a lot of that is also infrastructure - Solar power satellites, Lunar structures, shuttlepods, drones and robots, monitor satellites, anything needed to support the SPS network and experimental Lunar mining systems. Robotic or remote-monitored infrastructure probably represents 2/3 of the investment, or close to $2 000 000 000 dollars of hardware zipping around in various orbits.</i><br /><br />Why would humans be needed on-sight? That's the biggest question I've been wondering about. Telepresence seems like the real game-changer. A scenario like Avatar makes humans in space make sense -- lightyears from Earth, you need decision-makers on the spot. But if we were talking about mining asteroids for materials, would we be able to do everything remotely? Just how smart will our bots get? Current rovers aren't really autonomous -- we program everything they do, they don't drive themselves. But once we work out the kinks of asteroid mining, it would make sense for the robots to direct themselves. They know how to prospect, they know how to mine, they can call for help when they find a nice, big 'roid. Self-maintaining machines would be the game-changer. What would humans add to the mix?jollyreaperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05673007647719726846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-10536347538379998882010-11-29T07:53:58.823-08:002010-11-29T07:53:58.823-08:00That can even be fuel for the rebellion scenario: ...<i><br />That can even be fuel for the rebellion scenario: a colony fueled by some sort of idealism, the original backers go bust, the new backers come in and change things in an effort to monetize it, and </i><br /><br />That's a hell of an idea right there. And it has the proper touch of failed human dreams to go with it. <br /><br />The idea I keep coming back to is space-based religions growing popular. Humans love to believe irrational things. If we go with the scientific explanation of the abduction phenomenon, there is a real flaw in human brains that can create sensations of dissociation and terror and we humans desperately seek to frame the experience with some sort of explanation. In the past we blamed boggies and faeries and the like. We're too sophisticated to believe in those things now so aliens fit the bill. <br /><br />If we extrapolate from that idea, what if our religious thinking remains irrational but becomes rather unconventional? Bring in ancient astronaut ideas and we could end up creating the idea that we no longer wait for the rapture, we have to prove ourselves by journeying to the alien gods for salvation instead. We know they orbit Sirius B, it says so right here in the scripture handed down to us by the Xenopope. So let's build our Space Ark and head off on our voyage of salvation! <br /><br />We've become so used to the pragmatic evil of businessmen and bean-counting that we can sometimes forget humans do crazy things for other reasons. Space Ark as a pointless squandering of society's resources on par with the Pyramids.jollyreaperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05673007647719726846noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-30757472317799821872010-07-13T19:13:53.471-07:002010-07-13T19:13:53.471-07:00The bubble will start when the lander enters the m...The bubble will start when the lander enters the monolith on Phobos and takes a picture of it's hollow inside!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-54733602083383053292010-07-13T14:14:17.173-07:002010-07-13T14:14:17.173-07:00I just made a suggestion a couple topics back abou...I just made a suggestion a couple topics back about the Mars cyclers. If there is a Mars rush, using cyclers as means of getting people there with artificial gravity, those cyclers then shoot off into the asteroid belt for many years before returning to Earth/Mars. Even if the Mars rush goes bust, those cyclers will still be out there merrily orbiting in their cycles. That would allow for pre-capitalized cyclers that would be able to service the asteroid belt.Citizen Joenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-41489667043508866072010-07-12T11:36:32.057-07:002010-07-12T11:36:32.057-07:00screaming for help from governments that probably ...<i>screaming for help from governments that probably don't have the capacity to help them...</i><br />I think I have a problem with this.<br />All the busted companies and busted whatever else are selling everything. Spacecrafts will be dirt cheap.<br /><br />Also, If the people up there are citizens of some nation, the government should have the moral obbligation (if not actually legal) to save them all. <br />(like that US thing about bringing back each and every soldier or its remains. But may only apply on armed forces personnel, don't really know.)<br /><br />Another thing a governemnt can do and a company can't, is to build up ludicrous debts and don't pay them for a while.<br /><br />Hell, if need be, martial law can be declared (mostly for kicks, martial law is soo cool in Romance) and the equipment and crews needed to save the citizens requisitioned with force.<br /><br /><br /><b>Another twist on the Economic bubble:</b><br /><br />Why does the economic bubble need to be linked to space exploration at all?<br /><br />I mean, let's say the average Evil Mastermind piggybacks an economic bubble of something else (like with the sub-primes and whatever caused the last bubble nowadays), and makes a few billions in that.<br />But let's say he is cool and manages to get 10 billions and run with the money without getting caught.<br /><br />This Evil Mastermind has always loved space, so chooses to openly invest his ill-gotten gains into something space-related (still without getting caught).<br /><br />If a few more of such people exist, the thing should work.<br /><br />And another one:<br /><br />What about bubbles only in space-related fields that before crashing manage to give enough funding to get something useful working.<br /><br />Like a Solar Panels or Rocket or Laser or Fusion Economic Bubble.<br /><br />I think that this last is much more plausible than a full space economic bubble like Ian Wright describes.<br /><br />But as life teaches, when mankind is involved the most mindboggingly complex solution is usually the truest. (i.e. probably a realistic scenario will have all three, the two of mine that pave the way for the space-oriented one)<br /><br />Btw, superb example Ian!<br /><br />-AlbertAlbertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-44847897680319407652010-07-12T11:14:06.318-07:002010-07-12T11:14:06.318-07:00There was an amusingly similar suggestion for inte...There was an amusingly similar suggestion for <i>interstellar</i> trade in <b>The Economics of Interstellar Commerce</b> by Warren Salomon. <i>(originally in ANALOG magazine May 1989, but collected in <b>Islands In The Sky: Bold New Ideas for Colonizing Space</b>, ISBN: 0471135615)</i><br /><br />It is a little complicated, but it boiled down to corporate magnates flying around in STL starships, utilizing time-dilation in order to cleverly game the economic system.<br /><br />In a latter editorial <i>(in ANALOG magazine December 1989),</i> he theorizes that the lack of alien STL starships is because aliens never invented the bizarre wall street instruments that we did, so they never had a compelling economic reason to invest in STL travel.<br /><br />I coined the word "MacGuffinite" to denote some magical ultra-valuable resource only available in outer space, that would suddenly make space travel a paying proposition.nyrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17803434779668506416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-83803616392646207112010-07-11T17:09:06.849-07:002010-07-11T17:09:06.849-07:00A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon...A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon it adds up to real money. <br /><br />I started to run my own set of numbers, then decided to move them to the front page!Rickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-43078049687198872502010-07-11T14:11:26.414-07:002010-07-11T14:11:26.414-07:00Aaaand my numbers are all over the place. This is ...Aaaand my numbers are all over the place. This is what I get for not working this stuff out beforehand. Oh well, the basic point still holds. In the space of fifteen years we've gone from a scenario that looks like our current-day orbital space, through a slow period of build-up followed by a massive economic expansion, to a bubble and crash scenario that leaves massive amounts of hardware circling the Earth.<br /><br />You could start this scenario in 2025 and by 2040 have as much hardware floating around as in any overly-optimistic 1950s Solar System. But now the hardware has the added cyberpunk features of unclear ownership and potential for catastrophic malfunction. Push the start-date forward to 2050 so you don't date the story too quickly, and you've still got a crowded-space setting by 2065.<br /><br />Toss a generation-long economic recovery in there, with some limited expansion built over the boom infrastructure, and you have a stable spacefaring society by 2065-2090. Not bad.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05828438966741169694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-36361576741867217822010-07-11T13:57:50.120-07:002010-07-11T13:57:50.120-07:00Another thing I just thought of: Not all space wor...Another thing I just thought of: Not all space workers will be onsite at the same time. But even assuming 2/3 of them are on Earth at any given time, that leaves over 300 000 of them in orbit during the crash.<br /><br />That makes things a little more manageable, especially when you consider that they are citizens of various nations. One organization won't be responsible for rescuing all of them all at once. This will put the rescue operation for any one nation onto about the same scale as the Canadian evacuation of Lebanon during the 2006 Lebanon-Israeli War.<br /><br />Of course, this means you have a half-dozen different nations struggling to rescue their citizens during an economic collapse, protect their space-based assets from occupation by other nations, seize assets backed by their rivals, and identify which sections of the infrastructure are sound, all while trying to investigate corruption and rules-breaking by the corporations running the assets. And some of those corporations are shell-companies run by government offices or sovereign investment groups.<br /><br />Good times all around.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05828438966741169694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-74412664167514202682010-07-11T12:56:09.053-07:002010-07-11T12:56:09.053-07:00The analogy would be that the vacuum of space = th...The analogy would be that the vacuum of space = the sea. If you had the right gear, you might be able to get something from there. So rather than gills, maybe you have a ship that can salvage some of the orbital debris. You have to recycle everything. Regenerative life support, like a small tomato plant, is very valuable. Solar power is like the wind turbines, but you could also throw out the big solar sail for 'fast' travel. Perhaps there is a huge tanker out there with remass but now even that is getting depleted. No, it isn't a perfect analogy, but much of the plot could follow... unfortunately, that wasn't a terribly good plot. Nice boat though...Citizen Joenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-55634349062912795802010-07-11T11:22:43.220-07:002010-07-11T11:22:43.220-07:00Waterworld had a built-in regenerative lifesupport...Waterworld had a built-in regenerative lifesupport system. The people in this scenario still need consumables. This is less Waterworld and more SeaQuest DSV.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05828438966741169694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-88974253852355837042010-07-11T11:06:26.389-07:002010-07-11T11:06:26.389-07:00That million people stranded won't really have...That million people stranded won't really have much need for the Earth money system. That means a shift to some sort of barter system as the various clumps of orbital groups try to decide what they need and what they can trade for other stuff. That sort of creates a [i]Waterworld[/i] scenario.Citizen Joenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-41450188393635725712010-07-11T10:46:37.156-07:002010-07-11T10:46:37.156-07:00(Part Four)
So how many people work in space? I a...(Part Four)<br /><br />So how many people work in space? I already assumed that 2/3 of the money spent on mass went to robotic or remote systems, so that leaves ~$1 000 000 000 000 dollars* of human mass. 2/3 of that is lifesupport consumables, work and emergency equipment, and carry-on luggage (Porn, mostly. Space is a lousy place to work). So that's $300 000 000 000 spent on tossing people into orbit, at $300 a kilogram. Assuming that human + supplies + seating comes out to about a ton, that's $300 000 per person launched. So there are about 1 000 000 people working in space, monitoring or building or repairing about $2 000 000 000 000 worth of hardware.<br /><br />One million angry rig pigs, stranded tourists, government inspectors, service workers, corporate accountants... All stuck in platforms that may or may not be fully functioning, their rides home dependant on companies that have just gone belly-up, screaming for help from governments that probably don't have the capacity to help them...<br /><br />Bad times, but an interesting setting.<br /><br />* Note: I dropped '000' from one of my earlier posts. This is why I'm not an engineer.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05828438966741169694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-15757147976333629612010-07-11T10:33:29.090-07:002010-07-11T10:33:29.090-07:00(Part Three)
A lot of that is in human mass - Con...(Part Three)<br /><br />A lot of that is in human mass - Consumables for life support, workers shuttling to and from home to space, government inspectors, accountants, etc. But a lot of that is also infrastructure - Solar power satellites, Lunar structures, shuttlepods, drones and robots, monitor satellites, anything needed to support the SPS network and experimental Lunar mining systems. Robotic or remote-monitored infrastructure probably represents 2/3 of the investment, or close to $2 000 000 000 dollars of hardware zipping around in various orbits.<br /><br />And a lot of it is really shoddy infrastructure. It's a bubble. People are in a rush to make money, and they've been cutting corners all over the place. Workers are undertrained - Or often working in positions they have no training for - and badly stressed. Some of them are high or drunk on the job to deal with the stress. Safety inspections are lax, because detailed inspections take time and cost money. There are rumours about all this, and some truly horrific accidents, but the money flows faster and the hardware goes up faster than the regulators and inspectors can follow.<br /><br />Eventually someone sits down and does a really detailed analysis of all this hardware, and accountants wade through the numbers, and one of them notices something off. Maybe it's the numbers from the experimental He3 reactors (The iridium magantomic ball bearings wear out faster than expected), or a couple of launch companies have hidden their true costs to boost their profits (Of course it's unsustainable, but the executives responsible figure they can hide it in such a way that someone else will take the fall), or maybe the efficiencies haven't really paid off in solar panel or battery technologies. Throw in some fraud from a hedge fund investing people's pensions in these technologies, and you've got a lot of scared people.<br /><br />Scared people make for a bust. One of the big investors pulls out of a project that involves a technology recently revealed to be shaky, and the project collapses completely. The other groups involved with the project were heavily leveraged and depending on this project to pay off their creditors. A couple of them go bankrupt, others are torn apart by their competitors, and in the ensuing investigations a whole lot of investments are revealed to have been built on sand.<br /><br />Crash.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05828438966741169694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-20799050853474928102010-07-11T10:13:51.982-07:002010-07-11T10:13:51.982-07:00(Part Two)
But they are there, and that means the...(Part Two)<br /><br />But they are there, and that means the money is there, and now other people smell money and are moving in.<br /><br />Enter the boom technologies. Someone somewhere is exaggerating, or outright lying. Maybe it's a solar panel manufacturing consortium hyping their panel efficiencies or development costs. Maybe it's a fusion development company that claims to have lowered the costs involved in He3 fusion. Maybe it's a launch company that has found a way to bury its full costs in tricky bookkeeping, all the better to attract investors. Maybe it's the battery manufacturers, claiming that their high energy-density low-weight powercells are competitive with beamed power. Probably it's some combination of two or more of these, combined with the enthusiasm of all that fresh new money that just entered the game. Regardless of the details - BOOM!<br /><br />Everyone smells profit or some advantage over their rivals. And the investors want it soon, because at this point it's been over a decade and they're still not making as much money as they'd like. People - Venture capitalists, corporations, governments - want their payoff. And they're willing to hype their developments, exaggerate their potential, and outright lie about the payoff, if it means attracting more money to their projects.<br /><br />So now the home investors jump in on it, because they believe the hype and lies. The pension funds jump in, because they believe that with those large corporations and the government backers in place this are stable investments. And the dishonest salesmen and fraudsters move in, pushing more groups to invest so they can skim money out of the froth of investments.<br /><br />And tourists. With launch costs down and all that mass being thrown around in space, actual real-space space tourism is now a going concern. The view from the Crystal Palace is spectacular.<br /><br />How much money are we talking about? The Gross World Product of 2000 was 41016.69 billion dollars ($41 016 690 000 000), but not every nation and not every industry is involved in the new space race. And the majority of people working the stock markets will probably not put a lot of money into a relatively new investment sector. I'll error on the side of caution and say that 1/2 of 1% of GWP goes to space yearly.<br /><br />That's still $205 083 450 000. Most of that money is backloaded. The initial yearly investments were relatively small, but in the past five years space investments have skyrocketed. Spread out over the fifteen-year period of this development, it works out to 205+ billion dollars a year. Just a bit over three trillion dollars, most of it spent in the past five years.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05828438966741169694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-63897102276837518742010-07-11T10:13:07.804-07:002010-07-11T10:13:07.804-07:00Ooo boy, this is all brilliant - I am so glad I dr...Ooo boy, this is all brilliant - I am so glad I dropped by this blog one day in the past.<br /><br />It's interesting that not many writers think of tech and society advances as bubbles, but rather as a rather sedate and unnaturally calm timeline. It always confuses me when someone puts as background, "It took 2000 years for someone to develop this, it took five millenia after that..." as though human society stays the same for even more than ten years.<br /><br />To use the Wild West analog that Sci Fi is so secretly enamored with, this would be the prospectors looking for rare minerals. They go out thinking they'll strike it rich on the gold in the river or in the silver mines of Nevada, and maybe for a while they do. Entire towns grow around them, and then everything goes prompt-critical and you're left with ghost-towns, abandoned railroads, and a ton of people in the boonies with no purpose or aim.<br /><br />Helium 3 would be the obvious "plausible" choice for Space Gold (with the added bonus that after the bubble collapses, it's a lot easier for one or two big conglomerations to swoop in and become the BP or Shell of Space [and right before, during, and after the collapse, He3 will be dirt cheap, meaning the only hurdle to jump costwise is building a cheap reactor to use it]).<br /><br />~ FerrardFerrard Carsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12671456223738050907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-45263102511958934542010-07-11T10:12:00.504-07:002010-07-11T10:12:00.504-07:00Let's say there's no really New Tech, but ...Let's say there's no really New Tech, but instead a whole lot of re-engineering. This re-engineering resembles what Eon Musk and other launch-entrepreneurs are doing - Taking old technologies and optimizing them for commercial launch, and redesigning the launch-support facilities for commercial launch.<br /><br />This re-engineering gets launch costs down to, say, $300 a kilogram. Expensive, but plausibly low enough to allow for all sorts of commercial development of space.<br /><br />Let's throw in a mix of interests supporting solar power platforms in space: Solar panel developers, green technology venture capitalists, direct-energy systems engineers, and of course just plain space enthusiasts. Their initial investments are low, but they also have some support from various governments pursuing a new strategic resource. Toss in advanced battery manufacturers, trying to sell their power-storage systems as an alternative to beaming the collected energy through the atmosphere. It's a plausible mix of interests understandable to current SF audience.<br /><br />After ~5 years of these guys building up launch resources and experimenting with different space platform designs, enter the Helium 3 enthusiasts. Mine the Moon for energy! Build your Lunar base out of Moon dust and aluminum! Cheap electricity for everyone and their dog! Again various governments are interested in this, for two reasons. One is that if He3 fusion works, it's a complete game-changer. Two is that the Moon is specifically designated as international territory and part of the commons of all humanity (Read, it's a huge potential resource and no one country wants to let any other one country dominate it). After much screaming, threats, and gnashing of teeth a deal is struck that allows for development of Lunar resources under international monitoring.<br /><br />We're now about ten years into the whole thing and so far no bubble. The Solar Power Satellites (SPS) haven't paid off yet, but launch costs have crept down a bit and the technologies are starting to stabilize around a few common designs. There's a new group of players about to enter the scene - Lunar economic expeditiary forces - And the big money players on Earth are starting to look seriously at space investments.<br /><br />The thing about big money players is that they're not stupid. They're not going to jump head-first into this scenario without some guarantees up front. Their plans are modest, they're working with various governments (And the new international monitor) to make sure their risks aren't too big, and their investments are in proven technologies.<br /><br />(Part One)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05828438966741169694noreply@blogger.com