for future generations. Many nations have access to fossil fuel resources and other energy resources at costs and prices often two to three times those existing in the United States. Making available to such nations an inexhaustible energy resource that could supply many of their needs at current cost to them must be considered of great importance to the full development of third world countries, since an inconsistency exists today between the availability of fossil fuel resources and the full industrial development of all nations. It is not up to me to judge whether industrial development for these nations is in their interest or not. Each nation will have to make these decisions on its own. Today, choices are severely constrained by the unavailability of energy resources. Many nations do not have fossil fuel resources of their own in any form, and they do not have the foreign exchange needed to compete against industrial nations for such resources in world markets. Were these nations even in a position to effectively compete for such fossil fuel resources in world markets it would imply drastic, immediate increases in fossil fuel prices in the near future. SPS can be seen as putting a ceiling or lid to such price increases. The imposition of such a lid on future prices for fossil fuel energy — by the same logic — will have a feedback effect to spot prices of today and the immediate future; if credible long-term economic options such as those promised by SPS are indeed available, the existing fossil fuel resources can be consumed with more confidence at an increased rate with ensuing lower prices in the immediate future — meaning the next five, ten, or 25 years. These fossil fuel price effects of long-term energy options such as SPS by themselves may amount to several billions of dollars of benefits to the United States alone and are increased many fold on a worldwide basis. These then are considerations of the short-term benefits of making available and pursuing credible, long-term, inexhaustible energy technologies. The emphasis is on credible and forceful pursuit. SPACE AS AN ENERGY BASE In the remainder of this century and certainly in the early years of the 21st century, the viability of space as an efficient, clean, and close to inexhaustible energy source for mankind will have been established. It is too early to tell whether remaining environmental and technical problems can be resolved, at economic costs, to make investments feasible. It is a fact, however, that all known fossil fuel resources on Earth represent about 10 times the daily solar energy that impacts Earth. The novelty, as well as the scale of space energy projects, have to be seen in the context of the particular economic sector in which these innovative activities will take place. We have summarized some very "aggregate” numbers in Table 1. The Edison Electric Institute recently estimated the total sunk investment for electrical energy production in the United States to be $161 billion (plant and equipment, historical dollars). We have estimated a similar number, in constant 1975 dollars, for that same plant and equipment of around $200 billion. This plant and equipment to date produces 17 quads* of electric energy. The American Gas Association estimates the incremental cost of adding another 10 quads in generating capacity in the neighborhood of $476 billion. These numbers reflect the increasing cost of capital as well as the complexity and regulatory constraints imposed on new electric energy generation capacity. This estimate, coming from the Edison Electric Institute, may be *1 quad = IO15 British thermal units (Btu).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==