Book Review: X-15 Diary

Today, private companies are researching hypersonic vehicles designed to reach Earth orbit at speeds up to Mach 25 (25 times the speed of sound).  The last quarter of the 20th century was the era of the Concorde, a passenger plane flying at Mach 2; and of course, there was the space shuttle, lasting up to 2011.  All of these planes and spaceships owe their existence to the now legendary X-15, the first supersonic jet/rocket plane to reach into space, short of Earth orbit, other than rockets.

  This craft, with its beginnings in 1954, was intended to be a test plane, but then came the dawn of the space age in 1957, with the Soviets sending up the world’s first spacecraft and satellite.  In a panic, the U.S. scrambled in an effort not to be left behind during the Cold War, so they deemed the X-15 to become an experiment spacecraft, in addition to the planned project Mercury.  In the U.S., there was controversy on what type of spacecraft would be their workhorse for space, the rocket with its space capsule, or a spacecraft resembling a jet.

Only three X-15s were built, by North American.  The engines, and there were several types, were build by Reaction Motors.  Only two B-52s were used to carry them up to before release.

The competition here is that while a rocket with a space capsule and astronaut would blast off in space and come back down, uncontrolled with only a parachute, the X-15 could be steered and controlled from take-off to landing, at the pilot’s discretion, at all times.

This book is a diary by Richard Tregaskes, a journalist and writer having full access to the testing of the X-15 (X meaning experimental).  This diary dates from February 1959, before the first test, to November 1960, in the early successful runs, with many failures in between these runs.  The X-15 continues to be tested until 1968, to the flight of Apollo 7.  

What should be noted is that this diary tells of the history of rocketry, from 16th century China to the early pioneers like Robert Goddard, Konstantin Tsiokovsky, and Werner Von Braun.  It tells of how the U.S. acquired rocket technology from these pioneers, including the seizing of German rockets and scientists during the war, testing in White Sands, New Mexico, and includes the first plane to break the sound barrier, the X-1, piloted by Chuck Yeager, continuing on to the development of America’s first rockets and the establishment of Cape Canaveral.

It also tells of test pilots of other planes, and how many of these pilots were killed, being part of the process of testing these advanced aircraft.

This diary mostly covers each individual test of the X-15 air/spacecraft and with trials it has endured.  

The three main pilots mentioned here are Scott Crossfield, who tested the majority of the flights logged here, along with Bob White and Joe Walker.  Neil Armstrong, the first man on the Moon, was also a test pilot, but not in these early flights.

The X-15 was shaped like a cigar, with stubbed wings, and small enough to fit under the wing of a B-52.  The B-52 would take the X-15 to heights up to 45,000 feet or more, release the plane, where it would ignite its jets and soar to the edge of space.  In order to protect the pilot, the X-15 was escorted by chase planes, being F-100s, F-104s, choppers, and a C-130 weather ship.

The X-15 was painted black, hence the name Blackbird, and carried only one pilot.  It was tested at Edwards Air Force Base in California, by the Air Force.  If successful, it would be turned over to NASA for use.

Most of the plane, a good two-thirds, carried fuel.  The fuel was:  1,200 gallons of anhydrous ammonia (water alcohol), 1000 gallons of liquid oxygen, with smaller tanks of hydrogen peroxide, liquid helium, and liquid nitrogen.  The water alcohol and liquid oxygen mix forming a controlled explosion powering the plane, and the other fuels keep the liquid oxygen cold at sub-zero temperatures, and prevents overheating of the engines.

The metal has to be heat resistant at high speeds against the friction of the atmosphere.  Hoses, pressure valves, bolts, all must be tight with no leaks, the engines cannot overheat, and oxygen must be supplied to the pilot to breathe, the cabin must be pressurized, and meters must have perfect readings.  One little glitch can range from failure of the plane to function correctly to the plane exploding and killing the pilot.  This factors determined the tests.

For the first year and a half, each test was recorded in this diary with all the details.  At first, there were failures like smoke in the cockpit before the plane was released.  For the first three tests, the X-15 flew captive, meaning it was not released from the B-52.  From the fourth test on, the plane at first flew at low speeds and altitude to check for flaws, and there were many:  leaks in the hose to inaccurate meters, leading the plane to abort the test. 

There were successes, from flying to 70,000 feet at Mach 2 to flying up to 136,600 feet at Mach 3.3.  Two successful flight tests, however, were rare, if they occurred.  This is due to constant breakdowns in the entire system of the plane.

A successor, the Dyna-Soar, was planned to fly into Earth orbit, but because of the technical difficulties in the X-15 tests, the Dyna-Soar was never built.

Although the diary ends in November, 1960, the X-17 continued testing until 1968, when the project was discontinued, due to numerous technical problems.

Some footnotes here.  In August, 1963, Joe Walker flew up to 100 kilometers (62 miles), up to the edge of space and officially became an astronaut.

Tragically, on November 15, 1967, Michael Adain was killed when an airframe during his flight collapsed.

Many space advocated have lamented the cancellation of the X-15 project, believing that it would have been a better alternative to space than the rocket, and had these flights continued, we would be more advanced in space than we are today.

This diary reveals the truth.  The attempt was made, but back then, we lacked the technology to accomplish this, so we had no choice but to rely on the rocket, meaning Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo.  The space shuttle was an attempt to advance to the space plane, but that too was a failure, due to the fact that it took six months to refurbish it between each flight, costing literally billions of dollars. 

The X-15 did lead to later advanced in aerospace technology, creating more advanced heat resistance materials and better engines, with supersonic aircraft today that are more advanced than the X-15 ever was.  

Today, private companies are making new strides in hypersonic air/space craft.

This is simple trial and error, and try again.

How to Prepare for Mars, For The Rest of Your Life

This is not a technical or engineering book on how to get to Mars.   It is definitely not science fiction.   These are covered, but this is mostly a book on psychology in coping with a brand new situation.  I do believe that this book covers all bases on this subject.

In 2011, a tycoon from Holland announced the Mars One project, where people and equipment would be launched to Mars in groups of four, land, set up a colony, and literally spend the rest of their lives there.  Every two years, four more people would be added, leading to a settlement, and eventually, a town, a city, and then a civilization.  This isn’t mentioned here, but I assume that that is the case.

Mars has thin air, made mostly of carbon dioxide, gravity that is 38 percents that of Earths, and extremely cold temperatures.  Ranging from 60 degrees Fahrenheit at the equator during the day down to 200 degrees below zero at night, at least in the northern and southern extreme regions.  No human could presently survive there without a spacesuit and an advanced life support system, at least for the present.

I’m going to make another assumption here.  As more people come to settle on the red planet, they will have their own food supply and use the Martian resources to expand their habitats.  Eventually, they will try to terraform the planet.  That is, making Mars comparable to Earth like conditions where one can walk around the planet without any spacesuit or other forms of life support.  This may take two centuries or more, but I think that is the final goal.  This is not mentioned in the book, but I think that is a given.

What is mentioned, and what the book is focused on is the psychology of humans, how they would react one to the remote of being on a new and empty world, and how they would get along with the other settlers.

People from all over the world have applied to be one of the settlers, and they have to go through a 10 year process.  How will anyone respond to someone from another culture where mannerisms are different?  How will one get along with another?  What of personality clashes?  Can one cooperate with another?  Culture norms vary worldwide, and many of these, no matter how trivial they seem, are explained.  For example, in the Orient, when someone offers you a gift, it is customary to refuse it twice before accepting it, to insure the taker that the giver really does want to give it.

In reacting to the environment, will one get homesick?  Will one pine for Earth, its cities, and what it always provided for them?  What about family and friends?  Being in remote part of the world here on Earth can be depressing, and I myself have been to places like the Arctic in remote villages.

As for the environment, one will have to know how to fix a certain system of life support, such as air purifiers or water processes, without any new parts arriving from Earth?  One has to fix machines with what is available there on Mars, and one cannot afford to wait two years for new supplies.

This is the tip of the iceberg, but the authors have just about everything covered.  They’ve done their homework, and everything is taken into consideration.  

Candidates have been interviewed, and some of the questions they answered are featured in this book.  Requirements are also listed both in education and how they can handle stressful situations in life.

Little known facts are featured.  One surprising revelation is the story where NASA spent one million dollars for a pen able to function in zero gravity.  The Russians used a pencil.  This may make NASA look like fools, but what isn’t mentioned is that mechanical pencils were used by NASA, but when lead, and pencil shavings float around the capsule, they could cause extensive damage to computers in the ship, possibly even leading to a fire, such as what happened in Apollo 1.

The last section of the book covers how life can be lived on Mars, not only doing the required work, but unleashing creativity once everyone is settled and has more time.  New forms of art will definitely be created, and settlers will be creative with Mars’ resources;  i.e.  the red rocks themselves.

This book has been well researched, and different authors in their fields have contributed one chapter at a time, so you will see many different viewpoints on this subject.

A Letter to Future Space Settlers, From the 21st Century

This is for any future space settler, whether you are now living on the Moon, Mars, a space habitat, or anywhere else in the Solar System.  As of this writing, you will not be born for another century or two.  When you read this, I will be dead for that amount of time.  It doesn’t matter.  I would like to share with you my experiences and give you some advice that I think you will need.

I have been a visionary all my life.  I have seen the space movement from the very beginning.  The very first live launch I have seen on television was that of Gemini 5, carrying two astronauts, named Gordon Cooper and Charles Conrad.  I have personally met Gordon Cooper, along with many other astronauts, including the very first ones that walked on the Moon.

From then on, I have been in love with the universe and have wanted all humankind to venture into space and settle there, where you are now, hopefully.  I have talked of my vision, of humanity venturing to other planets and eventually, to other stars.  I’ve read science fiction, imagining how our future in space will be, and how it will relate to the rest of us here on Earth.  I have also written a lot of space development on the steps we should take.  As of this reading, some of these steps I’ve written have come to fruition, others have not, but that is to be expected of any writer.

I hope to see space benefit Earth in a big way;  bringing in money, not for a few but for the many, helping to alleviate poverty by creating new jobs, jobs that as of right now we cannot even begin to imagine, bringing in new resources, and products made from these resources.  Most of all, I hope that, by moving more and more polluting industries into Earth orbit, the asteroids, the Moon and beyond, it will not only reverse the effects of pollution and the damage it did to our environment, but to restore the Earth to its clean natural state;  i.e.  forests, jungles, the deacidification of the ocean, the decrease of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere leading to a reversal in climate change.

There is one more factor I hope to see;  peace in space.  If you can’t end war on Earth, and I expect it won’t be ended anytime soon, even as you read this letter, at least do not carry it with you as you venture into the final frontier.  I can think of at least one way to avoid this horror.

As people from many different countries venture into space and settle on the Moon, Mars, the asteroids, and beyond, they will bring their industries, their culture, language, and ways of life with them, and these will be settled on these planets, some right next to other colonies from different countries and cultures.

As time progresses, and you mingle with more people from other cultures on your worlds, regardless of their origin, you will learn in live on these worlds and function independently of Earth.  Of course, you will continue to do business with Earth and other space settlements, but between yourselves, you will be interdependent upon one another.  In other words, you will be closer to each other more than your respective countries on Earth.

With that, it is inevitable that you will no longer need Earth’s resources, and politically, you will decide to become independent of your respective countries on Earth, and will want to govern yourselves completely, with no outside interference.  It’s going to happen, and you will declare your independence.  This is the human side on settling far away places.  This is the way it’s always been, and always will be.

You will have my full support.

Just one thing. 

As I have stated, depending on your national origin, your settlements will be different from one another.  American space settlements will be different from European space settlements, who will be different from Russian settlements, different from the Chinese, the Japanese, the Brazilians, and so on, depending on who is up there.

When you do declare your independence, do not separate yourselves in different countries on the Moon, Mars, or any other heavenly body.  Become independent together, meaning pool all your resources, knowledge, culture, language, and become ONE country, one country to a planet or asteroid (in the form of an O’Neill space habitat).  Don’t have separate countries on the Moon or Mars, have one Republic of the Moon, a Republic of Mars.  Give yourselves any name you want, but get together and form a single country on your respective worlds.

Here’s why.  Borders are the great dividing factor.  They’re walls, separating one people from another, and on planets where life support systems are vital, and you cannot afford to be separate from one another.  You will need each other’s resources, life support systems, manufacturing facilities, and you cannot afford the inconvenience of going through customs at international borders.  

One last reason.  Should any of these “countries” conflict, it could result in war, and in the position that all of you are in, depending on each other for survival, you cannot have that.  One war in space, one space nation against another, can result in the destruction of ALL living settlements in space.  I need not go any further on this subject.

Therefore, wherever you are, unite with one another.  You will not only survive, but you will flourish.   Learn from the mistakes of Earth, and go forward, learning and benefitting from each other.  

Take the best of each culture that settles in space.  Leave the worst out of it.

Book Review: "The War of the Worlds" by H.G. Wells

Forget any movie you may have seen with this title, be it the 1956 or 2005 version.  This book by H.G. Wells was written in 1898 and is set fully in England during that time period.  If you live in England, or have visited, you will have a better time imagining the scenery.

In brief, the Martians, being green and ugly intelligent lifeforms, realize their civilization on Mars is dying and look to Earth, a young, more lively planet, and they want to settle on it.  They invade by sending down meteor like objects, and them arm themselves with impenetrable metal armor, using heat rays and poison gas, they wander the English countryside, and London, and destroy everything in its path.  There is a scene where a human gets eaten, as the Martians also find a plentiful food supply (humans).

The hero of the story, a man unnamed, narrates the entire story, giving his viewpoint, and constantly runs from these Martians, enduring panicking crowds in London, a companion hiding in a watched, abandoned house with a companion who also panics all the time making his life miserable, and afterward, runs into a soldier with plans on how to fight the Martians once they are settled.  He also endures starvation, sleepless days and nights, and all in all, rough survival techniques.

Before you compare this to more recent science fiction, I advise you not to judge this book negatively or call it “dated”.  It was written and released in 1897 and is set in the time period, dealing with the Mars as we then knew of it, compared to what space technology and NASA space probes such as Mariner, Viking, Spirit and Opportunity, and Curiosity has finally revealed to us today.  In reading this book in this day and age, you must suspend your knowledge of what the real Mars is and enjoy the story for what it is.  You will be surprised.

Also remember that H.G. Wells is one of the pioneers of modern Science Fiction, along with other greats such as Jules Verne.  Wells also has written other classics such as “The Time Machine” and “The Invisible Man,” also recommended.  He has also written many non-fiction essays dealing with the world and humanity during his time.

Many of Wells’ editorial beliefs are in this book.  One little known fact is that in the time it was written, Wells’ was making a satirical comment on the British colonization of Africa during the buildup of the British Empire, and how the British colonists were treating the natives of these lands.  To this I should add India, China, Australia (the aborigines), and Ireland.  Read these histories to understand.

In the book, the Martians are technically advanced but unsympathetic, but Wells compares this to a human stepping on an anthill.  Also think about this.  If and when we settle space and finally reach another star system, and we find it had intelligent life, but not as developed as ourselves, how would we treat them?  Would we, in our enlightenment, leave the planet alone and let them develop on their own, or would we take the planet, going as far to exterminate its natives?!  In a sense, we would be the evil Martians that Wells depicted, and I think he was fully aware of this.

Although Mars itself has shown to have no life, this book is not outdated by any means.  It is also a warning to us that as we ourselves venture out into space, we have to know at all times who we are, and what we must not become.

Book Review: How We'll Live on Mars by Stephen L Petranek

This is a brief but informative book, about 77 pages with photographs in the middle of the book.  Brief doesn’t mean bad;  in fact, I think it’s rather good, pertaining to the intelligent person, even if they know little about space development.  In other words, it’s for anyone who is interested in this topic.

The author, Stephen Petranek, takes the Mars of what modern science has revealed to us through it’s probes, from Mariner to Curiosity and what theses probes have analyzed and found.  A brief history of rocketry and the proposals of using them for Mars exploration are also covered, from Robert Goddard and Werner von Braun in the early 20th century all the way down to Elon Musk of SpaceX and the Dutch entrepreneurs, Bas Lansdorp and Arno Wielders, who proposed the Mars One missions, being one way trips to Mars where people would go and live out the rest of their lives on the red planet.

In landing on Mars, Petranek anticipates what may go wrong, such as drilling for water through rock and permafrost and using the wrong drill bits.  Problems such as these are those the average person, and a rocket scientist would not anticipate.  He describes the climate, the thin atmosphere, the gases of which it is composed, and the radiation coming from the Sun and space, and how the first settlers will have to deal with them.  

In the last two chapters, he describes terraforming, making Mars more like Earth where one can live without spacesuits, and why we must go there.  The main reason is simply that we have to.

I agree.  Many people say that Mars is so dead and desolate (it is) that no one will want to go there.  I believe, that with the terraforming, and the minerals it holds that people will want to mine to make money, it will attract the right kind of settlers.  There’s another reason:  Earth is getting overpopulated, and troubles throughout the world, such as war and starvation, are multiplying, and people will want to escape that, going anywhere no matter what.  Any place, rather than staying where they are and suffering.

My own view is that we will, and must, settle and industrialize near Earth space, being the Moon and near Earth asteroids first before venturing on to Mars.  These are in Earth’s neighborhood, and we need to establish state of the art transportation and life support systems, along with bases that will support a trip to Mars before venturing there.  It may take 40 years, or 20, who knows.  

One thing I do like is the Mars One project, sending people on a one way trip where they will learn survival skills and to develop the resources there while we still develop the Moon and asteroids.  Unfortunately, they do not (yet) have the financing.

This book is brief, and the predicted date of first landing here is 2027.  Whether or not we make it on time, this book provides a good vision on how we can handle the challenges.  The Moon and near Earth space is not mentioned here, but that, in this case, is irrelevant.

As I stated, I myself believe in a step by step approach to Mars, going to the near Earth asteroids, the Moon, then Mars, then the asteroids between Mars and Jupiter (where the book ends), and eventually, out to the stars.  But let’s not get ahead of ourselves!

Space and the Environment

The space movement and the environmental movement should join together.  They should and need to do that, because they would complement each other in ways either side cannot imagine right now (the space advocates can, but the environmentalists have yet to understand), and this article will explain why.

To summarize, we all know of pollution and climate change.  Factory and power plants are spewing out carbon dioxide, methane, mercury, and many other toxic chemicals that are heating the atmosphere, melting the ice caps and raising the sea level, causing sever weather disruption, and poisoning the air, ground, and water and killing both plant and animal life, including human beings.  Mining for minerals from coal and iron to gold and platinum require the use of chemicals that poison the water and destroy the landscape.  Mountain top removal for coal mining destroys both the landscape and the surrounding environment, literally making it uninhabitable. 

The other side of the coin is that we need our energy to run our homes, factories, and transportation systems and live comfortably.  We need our factories to have a vibrant economy to have jobs and, again, live comfortably.  We want a clean world, and yet we want to maintain our quality of life.  These two are not mutually exclusive.  We can have both, but we need to invest in clean energy, clean up our oceans and rivers, have factories not pollute the air, land, and water, and work to replant the forests and jungles we have depleted.  We also need a cleaner way to obtain badly needed minerals.

Is all this possible?  Yes, but we need to look to space to build factories, power plants, and mine for minerals on near Earth asteroids, the Moon, and eventually,  beyond Mars to the outer asteroids.  Mercury, the planet nearest to the Sun, is also a candidate for mining minerals, especially iron, but we have to build life support systems and machinery that can withstand the Sun’s intense heat.  

Space manufacturing plants can replace many on Earth that are burning coal and oil to manufacture steel and other metal products, by building these factories in space.  The Sun itself can be used as a heat source to process these minerals and convert them into useful products.  The problem of pollution would also be greatly reduced.  While solid waste cannot and should not be emitted, because space junk is a major problem in Earth orbit (see my essay “Out Beyond the Sky Lies a Junkyard”) and in space, it can always be reused.  The emitting of toxic liquids and gases, mostly gases, from the processing of minerals will not be a problem in space, because when liquids and gases are emitted in space, they disperse into atoms into the infinite void, posing no threat to anything else whatsoever, present and future.

Radioactive waste will pose no problem either, because space itself is radioactive.  The sun is one big nuclear furnace exponentially emitting more radiation than we can ever produce here on Earth.  Just a thought; when space travel becomes a lot easier, say 50 years down the road, perhaps nuclear wastes from Earth could be lifted into space and thrown into the sun, if a use for it is not yet found.  This is one more way how space development can help clean up Earth’s environment.

Asteroids can provide the metals necessary to manufacture these parts, using the sun’s rays to process this metal instead of coal here on Earth.  Zero gravity can also allow new allows to be formed that cannot be formed on Earth because of its gravity, so many new metal products, with a lot more finery, can be formed.  If the majority of these factories were to go into space, pollution would be cut down by a huge percentage.

Granted, one cannot manufacture an entire car and bring to Earth, but many car parts can be manufactured and bought to Earth for assembly.  This concept would apply to any other large machinery.  Manufacture the parts in space, assemble them on Earth.

Power plants generating electricity is another problem involving the emissions of greenhouse and other toxic gases, and in the case of coal, toxic ash also.  The Energy business is literally one of the world’s dirtiest businesses, but the advent of clean energy, such as solar, wind, and geothermal, is a new trend, and growing.  One little known source of clean energy lies in space.

I have pointed out in another essay (“Energy and Space Development - They do go Together) about Solar Power Satellites, Helium-3 fusion with the Helium-3 obtained from the Moon and other celestial bodies, and the use of Platinum mined from the Moon and asteroids for use in fuel cells for future transportation, power by Hydrogen, forming a new Hydrogen economy.  All this would replace coal, oil, and eventually, natural gas to fuel our societies, along with terrestrial solar, wind, and geothermal energy.  

Clean energy means no carbon dioxide, methane, mercury, and other poisonous gases spewed out into the atmosphere, or poisoning our waterways and land.

This brings us to the last major subject, mining.  Mining everything from coal to platinum brings deadly toxins to the environment.  In rare minerals such as diamonds and gold, chemicals are needed to extract them from the rock, and these very chemicals then leak into rivers, poisoning water needed for irrigation and drinking.  Mining coals causes black lung disease in miners, and the process of transporting it will give off coal dust, to be inhaled by anyone in the vicinity.

If we were to mine the minerals from asteroids and other planets, there would be little need to mine these same elements here on Earth, saving the landscape.  Whatever landscape has been damaged can then be restored nearly to its original shape.  Granted, it will never be the same as it originally was, but new soil can be laid, a new ecosystem can be placed, similar to what originally was there.  

This will take work, resources, and money, but it is a possibility, and it has been done in other exploited areas.  The science of land restoration is being practiced and improved upon, and we will need professionals in this field. 

Putting factories and power plants in space and mining the asteroids, and the Moon, will cut down greatly on pollution, perhaps, eventually, reversing the damage done to the Earth.  Should most of these factories be put up into space, pollution and climate change will be less of a problem. 

There will still be manufacturing plants on Earth producing items that cannot be made in space due to the unavailability of the required materials.  Petroleum products, such as plastics, will still be produced on Earth, due to the fact that there is no oil in space, and shipping it up there for that purpose will take a lot of effort, and money.  The same holds true for any other chemicals not available in space.  

Minerals and energy will not be a problem, and these will cut down on pollution by a wide margin.  How much is hard to tell at this moment, but it will be over 50 percent, probably a whole lot more.

Perhaps, from denuded and scorched areas, forests and jungles can be replanted, slowly reversing the effect of climate change.  When these polluted areas are cleared of their source, a new form of land restoration will begin, improving on this technology as we progress.

Eventually, as more polluting industries migrate to space, the Earth will slowly be restored to its natural beauty, becoming a park.  This is possible.  I do not believe that it is too late to do this. 

This will not be as easy as it sounds, and problems do lie ahead, but we can only try.  This is one of the prime reasons why space needs to be developed, to increase the quality of life, including the healing the of environment, here on Earth.

Note:  A new problem will develop.  As a lot of industries migrate into space, a lot of jobs will be lost down here on Earth, resulting in high unemployment.  Outsourcing to space will be a problem and raise objections worldwide, and the entire world economy will be greatly affected.  Whether this will be a positive or negative effect remains to be seen, and will be covered in the next essay.                                   

Alastair Browne

Clean Energy and Space Development - They Do Go Together

We are in another energy revolution, with the advent of clean energy.  We have to be.  Climate change is coming at us with a vengeance.  We still have plenty of coal, oil, and natural gas, but we no longer can afford to use them on such a large scale.  Nuclear power, once “too cheap to meter” has caused two major disasters on this planet, so far.  

Solar and Wind are increasing in usage worldwide, and their output is increasing at rates we never imagined 20 years ago.  Geothermal energy, the least touted of these three, is also on the rise.  

Hydropower was once thought to be a clean energy source, but dams have done unpredictable damage to the environment by blocking fish migrations, hindering, even stopping needed water from flowing downstream, dwindling the water supply further down the river where it is equally as vital, and has even been known to cause earthquakes.

Coal is the most polluting of fossil fuels.  Mercury is one major ingredient of coal, and the burning of it, in spreads into the air, causing permanent mental disfunction's in young children.  Other toxic chemicals contained in coal include lead, cadmium, arsenic, chromium, selenium, and at least five other carcinogens.  After the coal is burned and reduced to ash, these same chemicals remain in the ash, and the ash has to be permanently stored away for the environment.  Recently, there was a case where Duke Power stored ash next to a coal burning plant by the Dan River in North Carolina, where the pile collapsed and spilled into the river and cause a major ecological disaster.

This problem is repeated worldwide.  Coal is the biggest producer of energy in the world, and though the U.S. is reducing their coal burning plants, China and India are increasing theirs.  There are case in Beijing where the air is so polluting for coal that the residents either have to stay in or literally wear gas masks.

Oil is the fuel for transportation and accounts for 70% of all oil burned.   Except in countries in the Middle East that are mostly hostile to the West, the age of easy oil is gone.  A surge in oil has reemerged in the form of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, where a pipe is drilled into shale and chemically treated water is forced into the shale, cracking it, and forcing both oil and natural gas upward.  This process has been around since the early 1940s, but has taken off in the early 2010s, almost doubling the amount of oil on the world market and deceasing oil costs.  It’s beneficial to the U.S. and detrimental to the Middle East, but it’s also detrimental to the environment.  The oil and gas have been known to seep into the water tables, poisoning them, and there have been cases where people in areas of Pennsylvania and New York has gotten sick and relocated due to this problem.

Mining the Oil/Tar sands of Alberta, Canada have depleted forests and contaminated the land, and more energy from natural gas, with lots of water is needed to separate the oil from the sands.  Carbon dioxide is released in the air increasing climate change, making it worse.

Natural gas is being used to replace coal fired plants, but this should be considered an interim, a step to clean energy plants.  Although only one half as polluting as coal when burned (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/natural-gas-really-better-coal-180949739/?no-ist), it still gives off climate changing gases. If released in the atmosphere unburned, as this happens every minute, the methane emitted will have a more powerful effect on the atmosphere than carbon dioxide in causing global warming.  Of course, with fracking, the natural gas released will have an adverse effect on the environment, beginning with the water tables.

Nuclear power does not give off any polluting gases, but it does give off radiation, and in the event of a meltdown, which happened in Chernobyl, Ukraine (in the then U.S.S.R.) in 1986 and and Fukishima, Japan, after an earthquake in 2011.  As a result, the towns are permanently contaminated and may never be inhabited again, at least not in Chernobyl.  

There is also the problem of ever increasing nuclear waste, with a half life ranging from 10 to 24,000 years, or more (http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/radwaste.html; “Backgrounder on Radioactive Waste”).  We cannot find a permanent place to store it.  The nuclear industry is definitely on its way out, although it may be several more decades before the last nuclear power plant shuts down for good.

Clean energy, once touted as gimmicky, or believe to not be able to produce more than a small fraction of the country’s, or world’s energy needs, is coming into its own, and the quality of it is progressing at unbelievable rates.  In this category, there are, as of now, three main sources of renewable energy, with the promise of a future, and they are solar, wind, and geothermal. 

Solar power is making inroads beyond our wildest dream.  Photovoltaics, the concept of literally turning light into electricity, has improved in efficiency so much that where electricity from a solar panel once costed $75 per watt now costs seven cents per watt.  Because of this, a solar revolution is occurring where homes, schools, and businesses are installing solar panels on their roofs on a massive scale.

Many countries, such as India, China (which also manufactures solar panels, and has a glut of them on the market, thus lowering costs even further), Germany (where it is mostly cloudy), Japan, almost the entire world have join in on this trend.  Entire coal and gas powered plants are being shut down in favor of solar farms.  Countries and many U.S. states have set goals for how much solar energy they will product by a certain date, in the trillions of watts.  

Solar energy has become a disruptive technology where the utilities feel threatened, where the decentralization of power production is taking place, where homes are getting off the grid permanently.  

Wind power is another disruptive technology.  It is now bigger than solar, generating four times the amount of electricity worldwide.  The top countries deriving wind power are China, the U.S., Germany, Denmark, and the U.K.  In the U.S., there are wind swept plains that are ripe to wind turbines, from North Dakota to Texas, and these plains states, and California, are building turbines exponentially.  The problem of them stopping when the wind stops is now becoming irrelevant, because, being hooked to the national grid, somewhere, there will be turbines running producing power.  The best part is that the amount of wind we use today has zero effect on the wind we use in the future, so it is inexhaustible.  Of course, there are successfully replacing gas, nuclear, and gas power plants.

Geothermal energy, the third of the big three renewables, is big, especially around parts of the Earth where tectonic plates meet, such as the Pacific Rim, the Continental divide in North America, Iceland, Africa, Southeast Asia, everywhere.  Iceland derives 90% of space heating, and 99% of their energy from geothermal sources, powering the aluminum industry.  China leads the world in geothermal energy, with Turkey, Japan, Iceland, India, Europe, the the U.S. following.

The U.S. taps 25% of the world’s geothermal energy in use today.  The states where Geothermal energy is mostly derided is California, Alaska, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, and Colorado.  The amount of geothermal energy is the U.S. waiting to be tapped is 90% of it potential.  

It is known that about 82 countries use geothermal energy directly, and about 40 countries could be completely energy independent on geothermal energy alone.  These include countries in Africa, Central America, and Southeast Asia.

These are the three main sources of clean energy.  Hydroelectric power, as mentioned earlier, only works up to a certain point and is known to be environmentally disruptive, sometimes on a massive scale.  Burning biofuels, even wood, is polluting, and natural gas, even though is only one half as polluting as coal, is still polluting and still emits greenhouse gases.

The question here is, if the would is to run completely on clean energy, would solar, wind, and geothermal be enough?  These three sources are growing in power generation, but, according the the U.S. Energy Information Administration, they only generated 21% of the world’s electricity in 2011, with a projected rate of 25% by 2040.  Should the use of these three clean energy sources continue to rise, the projected rate may be higher, and it looks like it will be, but we will still need more massive sources of energy, clean energy, to satisfy the ever growing demand, in homes, transportation, and industry.  Coal and nuclear power are slowly being phased out, oil extraction is both politically dangerous and destructive to the environment, and natural gas is only a temporary fix.

Energy from space is the answer, in three forms:  space solar power, the mining of Helium-3 from the Moon for nuclear fusion (that leaves no nuclear wastes), and platinum group metals from the Moon, but mostly from asteroids, to help power a hydrogen economy.

The energy from the sun is literally billions of times greater in space than it is on Earth.  Because of Earth’s atmosphere, Earth’s infusion of the sun’s power in only one in 23 billion of the Sun’s output in space.  This means that electric power emitted from the sun in space is 23 billion times greater than on Earth (http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/; “Space Solar Power”).  A solar panel on a satellite up in space can absorb these Sun’s rays and power the satellite as long as the panels face the Sun.  

Solar Power Satellites is a concept thought up by Peter Glaser in 1968.  A satellite, with solar arrays, spreading out for 10 kilometers, would be placed in geosynchronous orbit (GEO).  GEO is 22,300 miles (35,000 kilometers) up from Earth’s surface, where the satellite would orbit the Earth in 24 hours.  Because of this, it would hover over one point on Earth at all times.  

A solar satellite placed in this position would collect the sun’s rays, convert them into microwaves, and beam them down to a receiving antenna (rectenna) on one spot of the Earth, where five to 10 billion watts of direct current would be generated and distributed to where that grid might deliver it, even at a distance of several thousand miles/kilometers.

The proposed technology has been improved to a point where 10 kilometers of panels are not necessary, and one proposal has a series of satellite 400 kilometers up, where they would beam lasers into a mirror and beam the power to Earth (http://www.energy.gov/maps/space-based-solar-power “Space Based Solar Power”).  When one satellite has passed, another would take its place, so the power would be constant.

These series satellites and SPS systems would complement, not replace, renewable energy sources, and would provide the massive power needed for industries and ever growing populations that Earth solar, wind, and geothermal energy could not provide.  Not only that, but remote areas in places like China, India, and Africa could have rectennas and provide power to places where the inhabitants would not normally have power, or would use polluting sources or needed plant life, thus providing power and saving their environment simultaneously. 

Helium-3, though not yet developed, is a vital fuel for nuclear fusion, a process of fusing atoms together, producing great amounts of power and leaving no nuclear waste.  Should nuclear fusion be developed, that would be another massive source of clean energy in areas unable to support receiving antennas for solar satellite systems.

Helium-3 is a helium element with two electrons and neutrons, like the normal helium atom, but with only one proton in its nucleus.  It originates from the sun and it carried by a solar wind to various bodies, such as the Moon and the gas giants, but also the Earth’s upper atmosphere, and quite possible Mercury itself, although that is never mentioned.  It can also be created with the decomposition of tritium.

Helium-3 would be used for nuclear fusion, the process of literally fusing two atoms into another element, producing massive amounts of power, with no generator or turbines, and little or no radioactivity.  

The first phase would be a deuterium-tritium reaction, the first step that is necessary to take to lead to the development of a helium-3 reaction.  The reaction here will leave a lot of radiation.

The second phase would be a Helium-3/Deuterium reaction, fusing into an element of on helium atom with one proton, and the proton could be used to generate more electricity.  There would be low level waste that can be taken care of easily.  With the advent of space technology, it can be transported into space and disposed of, should there be no use of it here.

The third phase would be a double Helium-3 reaction, the fusing of two helium-3 atoms into one conventional helium atom and two free flowing protons, again, that can be used to generate more electricity.  There would be massive amounts of electricity with no radiation or waste (http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/moon-mars/a235/1283056/; “Mining the Moon;”  Dec 6, 2004).

The third phase would be absolute clean energy.  The second would be clean energy up to a point, but with manageable waste or low level radiation that can be prevented from harming the local populations.  (I am aware of what happened at Chernobyl and Fukishima, be this was nuclear fission, the splitting of atoms, not nuclear fusion.)

Helium-3 can be found in the upper reaches of Earth’s atmosphere and on the surface of the Moon.  On the Moon, the amount of this element has been found to be 50 parts per billion (ppb) maximum, so digging nine feet lunar regolith about three quarters of a square mile, and processing the regolith would supply enough Helium-3 to power a country as large as the United States for a year.  With the addition of other energy sources, this amount of time could be stretched, but constant processing the the dirt would still be required.  The good news is that other needed elements, metals and oxygen are also contained in this dirt in a greater amount, so these elements would have to have priority;  i.e. taken out first, with the Helium-3 element at the same time, to save costs and labor, and make profits from these other elements.  Process the dirt for everything, and separate the Helium-3.

The planet Mercury would definitely have this same element, perhaps in greater amounts since it is closer to the sun, but it is also hotter during the day cycle, so there would need to be greater protection from the heat.  It would be mined like the Moon.  Near Earth asteroids would also contain this vital element.

The Earth’s atmosphere can be mined for this element, very easily with sub-orbital, unmanned spacecraft.

In later decades, long after we reach Mars, the gas giants could then be targeted for Helium-3:  Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune.  That would be at least after the year 2100 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium-3).

Now that we know the availability of Helium-3 and its potential for producing massive amounts of clean energy, all we need to do is to develop fusion technology.  Research on this technology has been ongoing for over 60 years, and the break even point, where one can generate as much energy as one expends, has not yet been reached.  After this, we need the breakthrough, generating more energy than expended.  Countries have been researching this on their own, but I feel it is time that all scientists and nuclear engineers from all countries collaborate on this venture, putting together what they have learned, and how to continue from there.  It can be done.  We need more research, facilities, and, of course, funding.

The last subject of this I would like to discuss is the hydrogen economy, involving platinum and platinum group metals.  These elements are rare on Earth, but are a lot more common in asteroids, and there are enough near-Earth asteroids to provide this metal.

Platinum, for now, is needed as a catalyst to help power fuel cells.

From the beginning, the hydrogen economy is slowly coming, and by this, I mean hydrogen can be used to power vehicles such as cars and trucks, and airplanes.  Hydrogen powers transportation vehicles not be generators, but by fuel cells, where hydrogen is mixed with oxygen, from the air, producing electricity.  The waste product emitted is water, so there are no polluting gases whatever.
There are many different types of fuel cells, using different fuels, but what will be covered here will be the Polymer Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell, that uses hydrogen.

If you look at the diagram, it can guide you as I explain the process.  Pressurized hydrogen gas (H2) enters the fuel cells through the anode, the negatively charged electrode of the cell.  When it comes in contact with the platinum coating on the anode, the hydrogen molecule splits into two electrons and two ions (positively charged particles).  The electrons then proceed through the cathode where oxygen (O2) enters through the cathode, splitting into two oxygen atoms, with a negative charge.  This attracts the ions from the hydrogen and, through an electrolyte in the cell, combine with the oxygen and the two electrons from the circuit, forming water (H20).  This also releases electricity to power the vehicle.  Other devices are required to channel the electricity, such as fuel cell stacks and bipolar plates, but this is the basics of a fuel cell and how it works (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/fuel-cell2.htm “How Fuel Cells Work.”)

In a hydrogen economy, there will literally be hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of vehicles running on hydrogen.  Obtaining the hydrogen should be simple.  Without the need for transporting it, there could be small refueling stations that will have the technology to take water and split it into hydrogen and oxygen on the spot, thus supplying the fuel.  

The issue here is the platinum.  With all those vehicles with fuel cells, platinum will be in high demand, and it can be found in only a few places on Earth, in places like Africa.  The process of mining it can threaten, even destroy the environment surrounding these deposits, so we will have to look elsewhere.  This is where we go into space to obtain it.

There are two places to mine these metals: the Moon and near Earth Asteroids (NEAs).  It is widely believed that platinum and platinum group metals (PGMs) might exist on the Moon.  These metals, because of their scarcity compared to other metals, are known as trace elements.  This list includes not only platinum, but other metals such as osmium, iridium, gold, and other related residual elements that may be of use on fuel cells.  If there are metals, we can mine them from the regolith, simultaneously with other elements, including Helium-3.  In order to obtain these PGMs, they would not be the metals to be mined, but other, more abundant resources, such as iron, carbon, magnesium, nickel, and these trace elements would be byproducts of the extraction of these other metals.

Whatever the supply of PGMs on the Moon, be it ample or scarce, the first place these metals would be mined from are the asteroids, not the Moon.

It has been proven that asteroids have large deposits of platinum group metals, and John Lewis, author of “Space Resources” and “Mining the Sky” explains the types of asteroids in existence and which one have the PGMs, and they are a lot, enough to provide metal for fuel cells to power every vehicle on Earth, and then some.

Here, all we have to do is to mine the asteroids, which is what we are now about to do anyway.

There are many categories of NEAs, but the three main types we will focus on are the low-low (LL) chrondrite asteroids, the 90% nickel/iron (Ni/Fe) asteroids, and the 98% Ni/Fe asteroids.  The iron and nickel asteroids is estimated to be 25% of all asteroids in the system near and/or crossing Earth’s orbit (Lewis, John S., “Asteroid Mining 101: Wealth For The New Space Economy,” Deep Space Industries, 2015,  p.104).

As with the Moon, the PGMs would not be the metal primarily mined, by as byproducts of the more common metals of nickel and iron.  This process is of obtaining these byproducts is known as carbonyl extraction, meaning injecting carbon monoxide in the regolith for a chemical reaction to exact the platinum.  It is estimated that one can extract 31 grams per ton with the remainder being dirt and other metals.  Other PGMs range from germanium (1.02 kilograms per ton) to Rhodium and gold (a little more than 4 grams per ton.)  

This may not seem like much, but, as an example, take the asteroid name 3554 Anum, a metallic asteroid with a diameter of two kilometers.  The weight is estimated to be 30 billion tons.  John S. Lewis, Professor of Planetary Science at the University of Arizona’s Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, estimated that, in 2014 dollars, there are $8.88 trillion worth of PGMs in the single asteroid, and that is the smallest out of the tens of thousands of mineable asteroids so far discovered.

From this, I feel that, regardless of how rare platinum is right now, there is enough in the NEAs and lunar surface (and eventually, other planets and moons) to satisfy the demand for platinum in fuel cells, and don’t forget the other metals having priority.  There may be a substitute element for platinum for these hydrogen fuel cells that is more common, so the mining of so much platinum may prove unnecessary.  

It doesn’t matter, for space industry will take off regardless.

The combination of the three clean energy sources on Earth, solar, wind, and geothermal energy, supplemented with solar power satellites, Helium-3 nuclear fusion, and fuel cells for a hydrogen economy, can make create a totally clean energy economy for Earth.

Energy is one of the dirtiest businesses there is, and as we run out of energy sources, such as wood (the first energy source), coal, oil, natural gas, we have to look for other sources, requiring more advance technologies.  As we progress in producing energy, the technologies gets harder and more demanding, but if we are to maintain and improve our quality of life, we must go forward, not back.  We need to give up fossil fuels, though their use will be around for a long time to come, even as we advance into cleaner energy sources;  i.e. oil and gas are used for making plastics, chemicals, nylons, computer chips, even medicines.  

We do need advanced energy sources so as not to drown in our own poisons.  It is possible.  They are both down here on Earth, and up there in space.  We need only to work and invest the money to obtain them.

Alastair Browne

Other References not mentioned in this essay

1. Brown, Lester; with Janet Larsen, J. Matthew Roney, and Emily E. Adams;  Earth Policy Institute;  “The Great Transition - Shifting from Fossil Fuels to Solar and Wind Energy.”  W.W. Norton & Company;  New York;  London;  2015;  pp. 19, 21, 34, 35, 41, 73, 74, 76, 84, 85, 90, 91, 99, 100, 102-107, 121.

2. CBS News, 60 Minutes, “The Spill at the Dan River,” covered by Lesley Stahl, December 7, 2014.

3. Diagram of Helium-3/Deuterium reaction from “America at the Threshold - America’s Space Exploration Initiative;”  The Synthesis Group; U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.; 1991; p. A-33.  Redrawn by Charlie Shaw.

4. Diagram of Helium-3/Helium-3 reaction based on Helium-3/Deuterium reaction (Ibid. p. A-33) and redone by Alastair Browne.

5. Diagram of Fuel Cell by Alastair Browne.

6. Energy Information Administration;  (http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=527&t=4; “Frequently asked questions, How much of world energy consumption and electricity generation is from renewable energy?” updated December 18, 2014)

7. Lewis, John S.; Mining the Sky; Helix Books, Addison-Wesley 

Company; Reading, Massachusetts, etc.; 1996; pp. 112.