Page 1 of 1

DOE

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:10 pm
by Billy Catringer
The "go-to" guy at DOE is a fellow named Rod O'Conner. He is Stephen Chu's Chief of Staff and, is or was, President of the Ansari X Prize organization. He also organized the Democratic Convention in L.A.

Bear in mind that the BFR will compete with and will likely drive many existing products and systems out of the energy markets. The interests who have a stake in current products and systems will oppose BFR if it is every noticed. It will not do to pick a fight at this point. This is a time wherein it is necessary to seek out allies in key places.

My opinion is that this project does not need a river of funding at this time. It needs numerous trickles of funding from multiple sources. The job should be broken down into discrete pieces with each one being funded separately under discretely worded titles.

Also remember that there is no love lost between the Office of Naval Reactors, a bizarre bureaucratic beast that is both Navy and DOE, and the rest of the Fleet. Take a look at the history of the nuclear power in the USN and you will see what I am talking about. Hyman Rickover wore two hats.

I would be very careful not to upset any Naval Angels the project now has. They are, in all probability, dreaming of a fleet free of the ONR. I think it would be wise to keep them apprised of any other sources of funding the project is seeking and listen very carefully to them if they object.

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:53 pm
by MSimon
Besides the military (read Navy) NASA would have a lot of uses for a BFR. Fuel transport for a start up colony on Mars would be on the order of tons per year. And may be extractable locally.

Putting (even dormant) fission reactors on rockets scares people.

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 12:04 am
by Billy Catringer
Call me unduly ambitious, but if the BFR turns out to be workable, there is no reason for us to leave this gravity well just drop back down into the Martian gravity well. The real money is out in the Kuiper Belt.

Mind you, I would not really object very much to a mission to Mars. I'll take what I can get.

My more immediate concern right now is that we stop buying crude from our enemies and wanna-be enemies. I think we are playing the game very stupidly at the moment.

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:20 am
by MSimon
Billy Catringer wrote:Call me unduly ambitious, but if the BFR turns out to be workable, there is no reason for us to leave this gravity well just drop back down into the Martian gravity well. The real money is out in the Kuiper Belt.

Mind you, I would not really object very much to a mission to Mars. I'll take what I can get.

My more immediate concern right now is that we stop buying crude from our enemies and wanna-be enemies. I think we are playing the game very stupidly at the moment.
It is not by accident. The enemies have a very good system of influence going.

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 10:29 am
by Billy Catringer
MSimon wrote: It is not by accident. The enemies have a very good system of influence going.

Sad, but true. This means that our most serious problems have little-to-nothing to do with technology and nearly everything to do with politics, as in, it's time for us to start giving our elected officials a very hard stare.

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:39 pm
by Scupperer
Billy Catringer wrote: it's time for us to start giving our elected officials a very hard stare.
They seem too busy raiding the coffers to notice.