An average industrial worker will CREATE about $200,000 per year.
Allocating $150,000 of that toward worker maintenance - which includes
pay, maintaining capital equipment and so forth (a non standard
accounting but useful in social planning) - this provides a tremendous
return - and you recapture this as you sell workers stuff that they're
building. The $50,000 per worker year goes in your pocket as creator
fo the system. So, there are 3.3 billion people available to work in
this system. So, that's $660 trillion of which $165 trillion goes in
your pocket.

Now, the world today produces about $70 trillion per year and about $3
trillion per year goes in the pockets of all the world's richest
people.

So, you can see we're talking HUGE transformative effects. The
opportunities created in space for the 9.5 million millionaires who
have $38 trilion fixe in liquid assets - far and away outclass
anything they might want to protect. Against this opportunity, the
2.1 billion working poor in the world, also gain by supporting this
system, even while older systems are displaced.

Why didn't the buggy whip manufacturers organize to stop the new
fangled horseless carriage? Well, some did! lol. But, their efforts
were a fools errand. In the end, the buggy whip manufacturers made
antennae and steering wheel covers - and made MORE money doing it than
they ever made in buggy whips.

Same here.

Some say we can't do the program I outlined above.

I say I am doing it and will continue to do it.

The first thing to realize is that the highest best use of low cost
hydrogen produced from ultra-low-cost solar panels in today's energy
economy is the production of hydro-carbon fuels.

See

http://www.usoal.com

for more info.

You have four immediate opportunities with hydrogen

1) inject it in 'empty' wells to mobilize additional production 800
bbl/ton
2) hydro-crack heavy oils to form lighter oils 200 bbl/ton
3) convert coal to light oils 70 bbl/ton
4) displace oil directly with hydrogen 23 bbl/ton

The figure of merit is barrels of oil you get per ton of hydrogen.
Multiply that figure by the current price of oil to get $/ton for the
hydrogen.

The first two make the existing energy economy more efficient. the
last two transition away from fossil fuels as you ascend the learning
curve and make hydrogen ever more efficiently.

Other processes are possible, and form some projects I'm sponsoring
with the technology. For example, taking methane and carbon dioxide
that both exist naturally in the Natuna gas fields and combine them to
make methanol and hence iso-octane using a little bit of hydrogen.
That's a special case though.

I am sponsoring eight projects around the world, 2 of them major coal
to oil projects overseas. I am selling commodities not capital, not
debt, not IP. That way I own about $200 billion of assets at the end
of the day when construction is complete in 3 to 5 years - depending
on when the project started.

This allows me over the next 4 years following to do about 40 coal-to-
liquid projects, similar to the first, each producing 200,000 b/d of
light oils from coal, sunlight and water. Each facility is worth $80
billion when in production at current prices. All together the 48
projects will produce about 12% of the world's oil output and I am the
world's first trillionaire. Steeply discounting the future value of
the planned production here, I'm worth a trillion dollars already! on
paper. (I have agreements for the use of the needed coal and land for
all the 42 ctl facilities)

So, that's a thumbnail of the next 10 years.

Technically, at each CTL facility I use 30,000 tons of coal per day
and 38,700 tons of water per day. From the water using 236.5 GWh of
solar electricity each day I produce 4,300 tons of hydrogen along
with 34,400 tons of oxygen. This is provided by 525 sq km of silicon
based solar panels built on spent and abandoned strip mines near the
operating mine and conversion site.

The collectors are arrayed into a spiral pattern forming a disc 26 km
across.

This means that all 42 ctl sites have a collector size totalling
22,000 sq km built on 22,000 sq km of abandoned mine sites throughout
the world.
.
The coal is hydrogenated in a Bergius reactor. This produces;

syncrude
methane
char

The syncrude is fractionated and you're done. The heavy stuff
remaining is hydrocracked and sent back through the fractional
distiller. The lighter stuff is sent back with moderately heavy stuff
to the reactor.

The methane is partially oxidized to form methanol and sent for
further processing

The char is partially oxidized to form carbon-monoxide. CO is
combined with additional hydrogen to form methanol which is processed
as described below.

Both methanol streams are dehydrated to form di-methyl-ether and
water. The water is recycled.

Di-methyl-ether is dehydrated along with a small amount of hydrogen to
form Butane.

Butane is polymerized to form iso-octane - the principal component of
premium gasoline.

The iso-octane is blended with the syncrude before fractionation.

In this way 220,000 bbls of liquid fuels are produced from coal water
and sunlight - from EACH facility.

The ash left behind after the char is converted has iron oxides
removed magnetically from it, and recharged with oxygen and recycled
in the Bergius reactor..

The tars and asphaltenes left behind in the fractioning process are
steam cleaned out of the stills weekly with automate equipment built
in and mixed with the ash to make about 4,000 tons per day of bitumen,
asphalt, and road building materials - worth about $180 per ton.

There are no emissions of anything that's not sold at any of the
facilities.

In this way I take coal purchased for $1 per ton, (buy the mine not
the coal) water costing $0.30 per ton, and sunlight - available free -
and convert it to fuels worth $800 per ton.

How the ownership of each facility is structured varies which varies
how the values of the facilities are realized. In the USA I own them
100% and own the retailing operations they supply. Converting an oil
retailer into an integrated domesticallly sourced oil company,
multiplying its stock value 30x or more.

Overseas, ownership and value creation occur by different routes
specific to each situation.

The ten years following is more interesting - but not before the back
channel of the previous 10 years is told.

In the first 10 years significant R&D money is being spent. Yet, the
solar panel technology is well developed after the previous 15 years
of effort extending all the way back to 1993. The chemical processes
are 100 years old - only the cost of hydrogen and oxygen along with
unique relationship with land owners and coal owners make oil for
$8.57 a barrel possible So, why waste money on R&D?

Because there's a radical breakout I want to orchestrate - and it
depends on space technology.

Solar panels already harvest energy from 93 million miles in space!
That's farther than the moon, or mars or venus or mercury or the dwarf
planets of the asteroid belt. So, terrestrial solar panels - plugged
into our existing energy economy in a way that makes a few bucks - is
the first step along the road to plugging our ENTIRE economy into
space.

So, R&D in space by my holding company makes sense in this context.

If you look at any balance sheet or income statement of any major US
based aerospace company, you will find a big gaping hole in such
statements. Companies like Boeing and Lockheed are making money hand
over fist selling airplanes, weapons systems, missiles, bombs computer
systems, financial services. They're losing money in one area. Take
a look at any aerospace companies cash flow and balance sheet and
you'll see they're losing money in space. Boeing last year took a
$1.7 billion hit on its association with United Space Alliance.
Lockheed ditto. United Technologies isn't making money in its space
sector. Accountants treat it as a loss leader to promote the skills
of the company. Others explain it as a part of one's national duty,
national service, pay back to the nation that gives the company so
much.

These stories make sense in good times. They do not play well in bad
times. I've owned Boeing stock since the 1990s. Since 1998 there has
been a strong and growing and vocal group that wants Boeing to get out
of the space business.

If any American company with a credible plan and pocketbook offered
anything to Boeing for those assets - they'd take it. They'd have
to. What's an additional $1.7 billion a year worth to the company?
Hell, they'd pay you if you could throw $10 billion in the kitty to
fund it for a decade so people would forget Boeing ever owned it!
lol. And the $10 billion set aside? You'd spend it on building up
the company. Its a win-win in anyone's book.

So, the cost of acquiring ALL the space faring assets developed by the
United States over the past 60 years would be basically 5 to 10 years
of future costs of existing space operations - which flow back to the
buyer, but get the current owners off the hook. Like I said, they'd
pay you a portion of that to get the space demon off their balance
sheets. They don't have to believe your bullshit. All they have to
do is believe you will manage it responsibly for 5 to 10 years out and
you have the money to carry the implied debt without disbanding it.
That's what the government will want too. Someone who will carry out
their programs at current costs for a period of time.

As the price of fuel rises, pressure will be put on airplane
manufacturers to sell non productive assets. The terms going forward
will get better and better for a company that is making fuel cost
effectively.

So, after the first TWO ctl plants - the one's I'm building now - I
organize my own aerospace company and seek to acquire all the money
losing space faring assets from the majors. I then build the multi-
element launcher system, along with the communications satellite
constellation already described. This alone generates $100 billion
per year in sales and sets the stage to add the following services
through the global network;

banking and financial services
trading and shipping services
telepresence and telerobotic services

These add another $1,000 billion per year or more to positive cash
flow, which supports additional research in space faring technology
and additional investments in space faring infrastructure.

In the meantime, I organize overseas operations to sell labor services
to drive the telerobots, current industry leaders to build the
telerobots, and work with all manufacturers word wide - to build
teleoperated factories in the US - to sell products in the US.

So,for example, say Toyota is getting hit hard by high oil prices.
Not only do people have less money to spend on operating their cars,
Toyota has to spend more money shipping cars and car parts around the
world. There's still a lot of steel in Michigan! There's still a
lot of coal in Wyoming! There's a lot of industrial space in
Detroit! So, why not organize folks in Indonesia say, to teleoperate
a factory,managed by American workers on site - to produce Toyotas in
Detroit? Why not continue building Fords in America with workers
from overseas managed by American workers on site? Its more cost
effective than shutting down the tooling building new tooling and
shipping cars to America.

In this way America's rust belt will be shiny and new again. Powered
by my solar derived fuel, churning out products in America at a cost
all Americans can afford. The unionized labor are paid more than ever
before, because they are producing more than ever before. In fact
workers in Indonesia and elsewhere, begin importing excess production
from America reversing our balance of trade - strengthening our
economy building our nation our world and our place in the world.

But that's just the first step.

The next step is orbiting power satellites - which I've described
elsewhere. High intensity PV devices operating in many parts of the
spectrum at once - generate electricity and drive free electron lasers
of very high efficiency. These lasers project beams of IR laser
energy at 1,100 nm wavelength, through holographic windows that direct
energy precisely safely and efficiently to any of the 42 ground
stations observable by the satellite - in response to a pilot beam
from each ground station. Only the 42 ground stations are illuminated
in this way.

Laser energy in the invisible infrared portion of the spectrum,
illuminates each solar arry with half the energy of the sun, yet
because this laser energy is precisely tuned to drive the silicon PV
cells - it produces 3x the amount of energy as sunlight. Furthermore,
it illuminates the panels for 5x the time in a year - so, over a
year,you get 15x as much energy from each site as you do with raw
sunlight.

What do you do with the excess?

That's right - make hydrogen with it.

The 30,000 tons of coal per day and 38,700 tons of water each day rise
to 100,000 tons of coal per day and 619,200 tons of water each day.
(the sites were chosen to their proximity to water as well as coal) -
and outputs increase from 200,000 bbls/da of oil to 700,000 bbl/da of
oil PLUS 53,700 tons of hydrogen. The hydrogen has a heat value of
1,236,250 barrels of oil.

So, I'll be producing 10 billion barrels of oil per year when the
power satellites are operational, along with hydrogen enough to
displace another 18.9 billion barrels of oil with pure hydrogen.

The coal fields are sized so that at 700,000 bbl/da - the coal field
is emptied in 17 years. This is the ideal field development time. At
that time, the stripped land (these are strip mines) is covered with
additional solar panels, and additional water is converted to hydrogen
and sold.

If you empty a coal field with a ctl plant in 1 year you overspend on
equipment. If you empty a coal field with a ctl plant in 100 years
you save on equipment, but you have lost the value of that last
dollar. By looking at your field and what you're doing - you can
estimate using calculus of variations the optimal plant size - and
given cost of capital optimal build out etc.

So, to recap...

The world burns

28.8 billion bbls of oil
5.5 billion tons of coal
1.1 billion tons of methane

each year to generate 15 trillion watts of power.

I build 42 ctl plants that produce 3.0 billion bbls of oil from coal
directly over the next 10 years using large solar collector arrays.
I next build 4,000 solar powersats that illuminate those solar
collector arrays with laser energy and expand the ctl plants to
produce 10 billion barrels of oil directly each year and the
equivalent of 18 billion barrels of hydrogen gas energy each year.

I use the oil output as a lever to keep downward pressure on liquid
fuels while Igrow the hydrogen market.

Simple.

Look at it this way.

A ton of coal has 23 GJ in it on average. A ton of hydrogen has 141.8
GJ. That's about 6.2 tons of coal in each ton of hydrogen. So, 887
million tons of hydrogen replaces all the coal use. A ton of
hydrogen is worth 2.55 tons of natural gas. So, another 431 million
tons of hydrogen replaces that.

The natural gas is easily converted to methanol which is converted to
8 billion barrels of iso-octane each year.

The coal is easily converted to 35 billion barrels of gasoline each
year by adding another 600 million tons of hydrogen.

After 2015-2020 time frame - outputs of all these primary fuels will
fall. Meanwhile demand grows 5% per year. There will be an 8% per
year growth in the shortfall. At that point oil - in the absence of
any other factor - will rise to $430 per barrel.

Yet here we have shown that by intelligent action we can reduce the
price of oil to $25 to $30 per barrel and sustain a rapidly growing
economy.

We can even predict the transition. In 2015 the natural demand for
energy without shortages would be around 37% higher than it is today.
This means that unconstrained by supply limits;

DEMAND in 2015

39.4 billion barrels of oil
7.5 billion tons of coal
1.5 billion tons of NG

PRODUCTION 2015

28.2 billion barrels oil
5.5 billion tons coal
1.0 billion tons NG

Which means that the coal fired facilities are burning 1.2 billion
tons of hydrogen, the natural gas burning facilities are burning 588
million tons of hydrogen.

At this time coal outputs will be about what they are today. Oil
outputs will drift down about 2% to 28.2 billion barrels and natural
gas output will drop by 10% to 1.0 billion tons per year. The coal
will be converted to 34.1 billon barrels of liquid fuels and the
natural gas to 7.3 billion barrels of liquid fuels -

Fast forward another 15 years - 2030 - and oil output has dropped 40%
from today's level Coal output has dropped 10% and natural gas has
dropped 60%

PRODUCTION 2030

17.3 billion barrels oil
5.0 billion tons coal
0.4 billion tons NG

DEMAND 2030
44.5 billion barrels oil
8.5 billion tons coal
1.7 billion tons NG

Here we start seeing the surpluses of the earlier analyses fall away.
At this point, hydrogen begins to dominate. At this point I sell off
all my oil producing assets and concentrate on hydrogen..

and other products

like beamed energy from space

and

other commodities from space - including food.

.

Some have tried to imply that the US government isn't supportive of my
efforts. Just let me emphasize that my comments about concentrating
photovoltaics resulted in the first CPV conference held by DOE NREL.
Sarah Kurtz, now head of CPV research for DOE NREL in Golden Colorado,
cut her Christmas vacation short some years ago to come out and look
at my prototypes at my machine shop! She offered me an SBIR grant
right then and there. I refused! We were spending what she offered
every month on R&D. We did work closely with them to find vendors,
qualified vendors, and do independent testing of my designs - no
charge. I thought that was nice. I was invited to the White House to
speak with OSTP about energy policy in both the Clinton and Bush
administrations. My efforts in part resulted in this adminstration
pushing oil to coal and I worked with the Air Force over the past four
years to establish FT-IPK standards for coal derived jet fuel. I have
been sent several RFQs and RFPs from the Defense Enersy Supply Center,
but they are far too small to fit in my business model (less than $5
million) - but I am working with a group there to arrange the forward
sale of 200 mllion gallons per month. This is a big deal for the
government, and well, they're working with me. Which says a lot. I'm
asking DOD to buy $21 billion worth of jet fuel from me, and asking
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to buy a similar amount of blended
syncrude from me - all on forward contracts. Again, they're meeting
with me and seriously considering these huge expenditures. Of course,
DOD and SPR are both spending huge amounts of money on oil - so, I'm
actually offering them a savings.

The point is, I am neither a government mole nor an outcast shunne by
the government. I'm a guy with a damned good idea for America, and
people who know,knowledgeable people, both at the R&D level, as well
as the operational level thorughout government that understand energy
- understand the value proposition I offer and are treating it
seriously, despite the fact that I'm a rank newbie. This makes be
believe strongly in America. It makes me feel proud to BE an
American, and I am certain of my ultimate success AS an American and I
work hard, as do millions of other Americans to make America better in
the future.

Some have said in response to my plan to grow food in space that it
will cost $25,000 per kg. While this reflects the current cost of
placing payloads on orbit rom Earth using expendable chemical rockets,
it does not reflect the cost of my system. Why? Because I'm not
using expendable chemical rockets.

I am using reusable nuclear pulse rockets that fuse boron and hydrogen
to produce a rocket of tremendous capability. Basically you blow up
a tiny nuclear charge behind the rocket, and ride the plasma wave
that's created. then do it again and again. about 1 time every
second. or with very tiny charges, up to 100 or even 1000 times per
second.

These charges use borane fusion for their power. No radioactive
debris whatever. Not only can you fly ships to the Asteroids in a
matter of days using these pulse units. You can also use the plasma
wave to push asteroid s around. People have spoken for years about
deflecting asteroids from collision with EArth. Well, you can use the
same technology to bring small fragments back into a safe stable orbit
around Earth, and then use these high peformance rockets to bring up
teleoperated robots - that process the asteroid into mines factories
farms and even forests in space - all at very very low cost. Lower
cost than you can do the same thing on Earth.

there are two things that are important about rockets. how fast they
go, and how much they lift. how fast a rocket goes is computed by the
rocket equation.

Vf = Ve*LN(1/(1-u))

where Vf = final speed of the rocket
Ve = the speed of the exhaust products coming out of the
rocket
LN(=natural log function
u = propellant fraction - dimensionless.

So, if your propellant fraction is 68% say - then,

Vf = Ve * LN(1/(1-.6) = Ve * 1.134

Which means the rocket can go 1.134 times as fast as its exhaust.

The best chemical rockets have Ve=4.5 km/sec

The best nuclear thermal rockets have Ve=10.0 km/sec
no nuclear thermal rockets have ever been flown

Early designs for nuclear pulse rockets have ve=25.0 km/sec
no nuclear pulse rockets have ever been flown.

Advanced designs for nuclear pulse rockets have ve=6,000 km/sec and
more.

These are truly monumental improvements.

The lifting capacity of a rocket is given by the following equation;

F = mdot * Ve

here the thrust (F) in Newtons is given by the mass flow rate (mdot)
in kg/sec times the exhaust velocity in meters per second.

high speed rockets are also powerful rockets!

Today the cost of rocket travel is a function of the cost of building
the rockets, because we need really large propellant fractions. that
means we build rockets in stages. Which means we throw away all those
stages and only get the payload back.

How expensive would an airplane ticket be and how popular would air
travel be if the airplane crashed after every flight after people
jumpe out with a parachute at their destination?

Not very . The key is reusability at reasonable costs.

This means getting clever with our stage design - if you're building a
chemical rocket.

A nuclear pulse rocket allows improved engine perofrmance which means
less propellant fraction, which means greater reusability - nothing
thrown away.

A careful analysis of chemical rocket technology indicates that
$150,000 per ton is achievable when launching from Earth, and $30,000
per ton is achievable when bringing material back from the asteroid
belt - once you make fuel on an asteroid from water found there..

A careful analysis of nuclear pulse rocket technology indicates that
$300 per ton is achieveable when launching from Earth, and $100 per
ton is achievable when bringing material back from the asteroid belt -
even if you mine the boron you need on Earth.

$100 per ton - means the 2 kg per day that the average American
consumes by way of food, costs an average of $0.20 - well within the
capacity of even the poorest of Earth (who makeabout $2.00 per day) to
afford.

This changes everything.
.

Some have pointed out without documentation whatever, that you can buy
entire villages in India for $1. They also said you could buy an acre
in Canada for $1. Such pricings if they exist in fact, do not affect
the price of real estate in Central Park or Tokyo. They do not affect
the price of farmland in Idaho, or in the wine growing regions of
France or California.

Similarly, the value of land created through technical means in the
right orbit, will have a tremendous value, greater than the value of
construction, if done efficiently, which will cause the market to
build it.

The important point is thet the assumption of economists since the
time of Ricardo is that they're not making any more land., Real
estate values are predicated on that maxim. So, actually building new
lands able to easily reach all markets and all buyers on Earth, is a
radical shift in the economics of land. Add to this the fact that as
we do a thing, we get better at it and do it more cheaply, land prices
on orbit will fall from their initial levels. This leads to a
different sort of analysis for rents and labor and income - and at a
very fundamental economic level, improves the prospects of the 3.3
billion unemployed and the 2.1 billion underemployed on this planet,
and gives us all hope that the faith and belief of our founding
fathers in the dignity of all peoples might someday be realized
through the prudent and careful use of technology to improve
everyone's lot in life without harming anyone or taking anything away
from anyone to do it.

The land mentione that was available at very low prices, land in those
regions nentioned, if it really is that price, there is likely a
reason for it if true.

If those who think $1 for a village in India is a good deal, or an
acre in Canada for $1 is a good deal, then I would urge them to take a
dollar of their own money and buy that property and learn about
comparative value in economics! lol.

If those who say such crazy things would be so bold with their money
as they are with my time and attention, and actually go out and do a
thing rather than talk about it, they'd find very quickly the reality
of a situation and perhaps not be so crazy and downright hurtful in
the future.
.