Since attaining orbit is still dangerous & getting more expensive. Why not start building the space elevator?

Question

It would be far more safer, and the amount of cargo coming and going would be limitless.

Though where would be the best place to build it? Australia? Perhaps because its the most geologically stable land mass?

Considering that a lot of people are too narrow minded or have limits on their perceptions to consider - alternative views. Its no wonder the project can not get the start it needs.

It won't take a few years, but actually it may even take a decade or several decades to build. A building alone is too flimsy - that much is obvious.

More appropriately an artificial mountain is needed to endure the natural elemental effects, as well as to support the internal infrastructure.

The Space Elevator itself doesn't neccesarily have to be a sole object. But also a combination of applications.

As such a rocket is made up of components, so too would the Space Elevator Project.

We don't have to build it all the way to orbital alttitudes, though most of the way is preferable as progress goes over time.

An intermediary tether station could be posted in orbit, on a station keeping status when ferrying cargo & passengers.

Answer 1

The one point that I didn't see mentioned here is that the space elevator must be built on the equator to avoid some really nasty problems.
cheers

Answer 2

The biggest issue is the materials - currently, we can't mass produce things like carbon nanotubes (although there was a proposal to use "cheap" diamonds in the mean time), althought there are other issues, like the harmonics.

Its worth pointing out that, contrary to what Ryan B and person just prior to him said, you don't build the elevator up, like a building. Rather, it's hanging a rope down, from a very high distance (ie geostationary orbit). Thus, its not your base that is under the most stress - it can be the top, or as stated, the middle, due to the uneven pull of gravity and harmonics within the system.

Answer 3

First off, I cannot honestly believe that this is a serious question, but since I really have nothing better to do, I'll spend some time to give an answer.

A space elevator is only possible in the realm of science fiction. More fiction, less science.

The officially designated edge of space is 100 kilometers, or 62 miles, from the earth's surface. The current tallest building in the world is only just over 1700 feet, or 0.32 miles, high. A space elevator, just to reach the edge of space, would have to be 194 times as high. Geosynchronous orbit is attained at about 22,600 miles above the ground.

Engineers have a hard enough time designing buildings of upwards of 1700 feet as it is, as the building would have to be able to withstand the winds at 1700 feet. A "space elevator" would have to withstand jet streams and other wind currents at around 36,000 feet.

Also, imagine the weight of this structure. The Sears Tower, which stands at 1,729 feet, weighs 440 million pounds. Assuming that the weight increases linearly with the height of the building, a "space elevator" that would reach the edge of space (100km or 62 miles) would weigh 85,360 million pounds. That is just an unimaginable amount of weight for a real engineering project.

Lastly, the cost. The Sears Tower cost $950 million USD (USD as valued in 2005). Any structure that would be built from the surface of the earth to space would cost an unimaginable amount of money, making it even more unlikely that something like that would ever be built.

Answer 4

Wow!I haven't heard anyone talk about the elevator for years... Cool!
We don't yet have the structural know-how to bind molecules strongly enough to keep the thing together... the top and bottom would be OK, but somewhere in the middle, it would shred from random pattern harmonics.
Sooo, write the weaving pattern algorithm for the fabric that would respond over the set of vibrations, and you can have it built.

Answer 5

the process of creating the ribbon needed to reach that far up and sturdy needs work. carbon nanotubes will be the main resource in building it, but to get that many nanotubes lined up that far is NOT easy.

a platform in the ocean is considered the best spot to build it.

Answer 6

Another problem no one mentioned is the anchor. It would have to be located at, or beyond geostationary orbit. Ideally we would have to capture a near earth asteroid and position it above the equator. This is not a minor consideration. Messing with asteroids, bringing them close to the earth: one screw up and you're toast.
Here's a decent website article on the space elevator concept:

The Space Elevator Primer
This is the quick answer book for the Space Elevator, largely independent of the specifics of the Elevator:2010 competition. This is what we hope the competitions will lead to within the next several years.


Quick Facts

* The Space Elevator is a thin ribbon, with a cross-section area roughly half that of a pencil, extending from a ship-borne anchor to a counterweight well beyond geo-synchronous orbit.
* The ribbon is kept taut due to the rotation of the earth (and that of the counterweight around the earth). At its bottom, it pulls up on the anchor with a force of about 20 tons.
* Electric vehicles, called climbers, ascend the ribbon using electricity generated by solar panels and a ground based booster light beam.
* In addition to lifting payloads from earth to orbit, the elevator can also release them directly into lunar-injection or earth-escape trajectories.
* The baseline system weighs about 1500 tons (including counterweight) and can carry up to 15 ton payloads, easily one per day.
* The ribbon is 62,000 miles long, about 3 feet wide, and is thinner than a sheet of paper. It is made out of a carbon nanotube composite material.
* The climbers travel at a steady 200 kilometers per hour (120 MPH), do not undergo accelerations and vibrations, can carry large and fragile payloads, and have no propellant stored onboard.
* Orbital debris are avoided by moving the anchor ship, and the ribbon itself is made resilient to local space debris damage.
* The elevator can be made larger by using itself to carry more ribbon pieces into place. There is no limit on how large a Space Elevator can be!

Much more information is available at our detailed FAQ page.



Frequently Asked Questions

* Science Fiction or Science Fact?
The Space Elevator was first proposed in the 1960's by a Russian engineer (Yuri Artsutanov) as a far-reaching engineering concept. The scientific principles underlying it are well understood and do not require any fictional inventions, except for the super-strong material required for its construction. Since existing materials are not strong enough to build the Space Elevator, it has been relegated to the status of science fiction, and as such appeared in several books, the most famous of which is Sir Arthur C. Clarke's The Fountains of Paradise. In 1991 a new class of carbon molecules were discovered carbon nanotubes (CNTs). Composite materials made out of CNTs are theoretically over four times as strong as needed to build the Space Elevator. The present Space Elevator design was conceived by Dr. Brad Edwards. This design differs greatly from the science fiction Space Elevators which would require billions of tons of infrastructure in space and cannot be built within the foreseeable future. In contrast, Dr. Edwards design requires a handful of launches on existing rockets and is extremely close to being achievable. The Space Elevator is therefore 100% Science Fact, with some technological hurdles that still need to be crossed.
* How much will it cost?
A lot less than the Shuttle, or the International Space Station... The entire system can be built and deployed for under 10 Billion dollars, and since all operations happen at the ground station, it is very inexpensive to operate - roughly $100 per pound initially, and much less as volumes increase. Having such a capable launch system will do wonders for the manned space program, by providing a low-cost, high-capacity logistical train capable of sending thousands of tons of supplies to destinations in orbit, on the moon or on Mars every year. By moving these materials using cheap climbers rather than expensive rockets, we can realize huge savings, much larger than the cost of the Space Elevator.
* What's holding the ribbon up?
Imagine yourself spinning a weight at the end of a string. The string is kept taut by the motion of the weight, and the longer the string is, the more time it takes the weight to go around. Now imagine a string so long, it takes the weight an entire day(!) to make a single revolution. If you were to tie such an incredibly long string to the surface of the earth at some point, it would remain taut, and for people on the ground it would seem to simply hang down from the weight, as if by magic. An alien traveling by spaceship, on the other hand, will see a rotating planet with a long string hanging straight out - much like a carnival ride. (Put yet another way, if you account for the rotation of the planet, the string is hanging from the ground, and falling into the sky.
* How do you get it up there?
"Getting it up there" is often referred to as "deployment". The first (seed) ribbon has to be launched by rockets and spooled down from GEO. However, the Space Elevator can make itself bigger (thicker) by hauling up new ribbon material. In this way, there is an option to rocket-launch only a lighter-weight elevator, reducing the number of required launches by a fair amount.
* What happens if it breaks?
The short answer is that (much like the string-and-weight example) the portion of the elevator above the break point flies outwards, whereas the portion below the break point falls down to earth. We have to remember that the whole ribbon weighs only about 1000 tons (about the same as a Saturn V rocket) and has the density and consistency of Saran Wrap, so if it falls, instead of crashing down in one place it is distributed evenly around the entire planet, with each square mile getting about an ounce of debris. The overall effect will be like a very disappointing global ticker-tape parade - hardly a ground-shattering event.
* What about space junk? hurricanes? lightning? terrorists?
There are many risk factors the Space Elevator design has to factor in. The space junk risk is mitigated by having the anchor on a ship, and moving it around to avoid incoming pieces. (Space junk is mapped. The International Space Station is regularly moved around in the same manner). In addition, the ribbon structure is resilient to hits from small debris. Since the anchor is on the equator anyway, hurricanes are not a problem. Other weather phenomena such as lightning can be largely avoided by moving the anchor ship. Finally, man made risks (sabotage) are largely mitigated by having the Space Elevator anchored in a remote region, so its permimeter can be safely and effectively guarded.
* What is the current state of Carbon Nanotube Composites (CNTCs) research?
Yearly production of CNTs is increasing each year by a factor of 10. Single Wall Nanotubes (SWNT), which are the type we want, are becoming available in larger and large quantities. CNTCs are maturing very fast indeed. They are now as strong as the strongest materials available commercially, and there isn't a technological barrier to making them as strong as we need them.
* Why isn't the government building one?
This is the most important question of all, and why Elevator:2010 is here. There is no doubt that the promise of the Space Elevator is mind boggling. And here lies the problem - it requires a paradigm shift. 100 years ago, people thought dirigibles were the only way to fly, and heavier-than-air flying machines are an odd-ball idea. Today, there is an almost unbreakable concept that you go to space with rockets, and there is a huge industry built around this concept. That's a lot of inertia to overcome, and it requires both technical research and public pressure. We're here to get the word out, and hook as many people on the Space Elevator concept as we can.
* When do you think the Space Elevator will be built?
We believe we can solve all the fundamental problems by the year 2010, and at that point building the Space Elevator will become a national priority project. It should then be possible to complete the construction of the first elevator by the year 2020.

Answer 7

wow...just wow...an elevator thousands of miles tall. dude that would fall over, and how do u want to get people up there to build. scaffolding? and how do you want to pay for this? with NASA's shitty budget? impossible