<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_09_1520226</id>
	<title>Japan Eyes Solar Station In Space</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1257780240000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"By 2030 [Japan] wants to <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/technology/sci-tech/japan-eyes-solar-station-in-space-as-new-energy-source-20091109-i50b.html">collect solar power in space</a> and zap it down to Earth, using laser beams or microwaves. The government has just picked a group of companies and a team of researchers tasked with turning the ambitious, multi-billion-dollar dream of unlimited clean energy into reality in coming decades."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " By 2030 [ Japan ] wants to collect solar power in space and zap it down to Earth , using laser beams or microwaves .
The government has just picked a group of companies and a team of researchers tasked with turning the ambitious , multi-billion-dollar dream of unlimited clean energy into reality in coming decades .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "By 2030 [Japan] wants to collect solar power in space and zap it down to Earth, using laser beams or microwaves.
The government has just picked a group of companies and a team of researchers tasked with turning the ambitious, multi-billion-dollar dream of unlimited clean energy into reality in coming decades.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033454</id>
	<title>Re:SimCity 2000</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257784800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It can also be focused to destroy your enemies.  No nation would willingly permit another nation to put this thing up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It can also be focused to destroy your enemies .
No nation would willingly permit another nation to put this thing up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It can also be focused to destroy your enemies.
No nation would willingly permit another nation to put this thing up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038480</id>
	<title>Re:UN/America needs to do this now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257762300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love this idea.  We power forward military bases from space, then cut the power if the base is captured.<br>
&nbsp; <br>Except, before cutting the power, we should narrow the beam from 100 yards wide to 3 inches wide and, you know, play it around a little.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love this idea .
We power forward military bases from space , then cut the power if the base is captured .
  Except , before cutting the power , we should narrow the beam from 100 yards wide to 3 inches wide and , you know , play it around a little .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love this idea.
We power forward military bases from space, then cut the power if the base is captured.
  Except, before cutting the power, we should narrow the beam from 100 yards wide to 3 inches wide and, you know, play it around a little.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036754</id>
	<title>Re:Nobody picked up the gundam 00 reference.</title>
	<author>afxgrin</author>
	<datestamp>1257798300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wait til the Super Dimensional Fortress crash lands on Earth.  Then the shit storm will fly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait til the Super Dimensional Fortress crash lands on Earth .
Then the shit storm will fly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait til the Super Dimensional Fortress crash lands on Earth.
Then the shit storm will fly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033542</id>
	<title>Re:Threat?</title>
	<author>sadness203</author>
	<datestamp>1257785160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dupezilla actually, from September 1.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dupezilla actually , from September 1 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dupezilla actually, from September 1.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033240</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</id>
	<title>Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>Maury Markowitz</author>
	<datestamp>1257784020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not going to happen. No use writing why AGAIN, I think this reply to the original post is just fine:</p><p>http://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/here-we-go-again-with-the-spss/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not going to happen .
No use writing why AGAIN , I think this reply to the original post is just fine : http : //matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/here-we-go-again-with-the-spss/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not going to happen.
No use writing why AGAIN, I think this reply to the original post is just fine:http://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/here-we-go-again-with-the-spss/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034696</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>jack2000</author>
	<datestamp>1257789780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some one always brings this up. The satellites used aren't of the dumb kind, surely there's two way link that would track any change in the satelite's orientation.
Better yet make the satellite auto shutdown if signal is not continuously fed to it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some one always brings this up .
The satellites used are n't of the dumb kind , surely there 's two way link that would track any change in the satelite 's orientation .
Better yet make the satellite auto shutdown if signal is not continuously fed to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some one always brings this up.
The satellites used aren't of the dumb kind, surely there's two way link that would track any change in the satelite's orientation.
Better yet make the satellite auto shutdown if signal is not continuously fed to it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034276</id>
	<title>Global Warming</title>
	<author>mistralol</author>
	<datestamp>1257788220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
If we suddenly start collecting more enegry from space and beaming it into the planet wont this also cause us to heat the planet more?
After all this energy will not have been collected naturally to start with.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we suddenly start collecting more enegry from space and beaming it into the planet wont this also cause us to heat the planet more ?
After all this energy will not have been collected naturally to start with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
If we suddenly start collecting more enegry from space and beaming it into the planet wont this also cause us to heat the planet more?
After all this energy will not have been collected naturally to start with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033980</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1257787020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find your reply inadequate. It assumes that no solution will be found to the problem of space debris, which is probably false; if commercialization of space is intended to proceed apace (And where else will the robber barons rob next? We're running out of stuff that's easy to rip out of the planet) this is a problem which will need to be addressed. It also assumes that launch costs will remain fixed, which is also probably false. It also assumes that these satellites will be as vulnerable to impact as current models, which <em>is</em> probably true, but not necessarily. For example, I see no reason why they could not implement them as microsatellite clusters using anything from magnetic attraction to one another to itty bitty winches with brushless motors to maintain relative position. It is likely that solar power satellites would use a phased array; there's no reason it couldn't be implemented as a cluster.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find your reply inadequate .
It assumes that no solution will be found to the problem of space debris , which is probably false ; if commercialization of space is intended to proceed apace ( And where else will the robber barons rob next ?
We 're running out of stuff that 's easy to rip out of the planet ) this is a problem which will need to be addressed .
It also assumes that launch costs will remain fixed , which is also probably false .
It also assumes that these satellites will be as vulnerable to impact as current models , which is probably true , but not necessarily .
For example , I see no reason why they could not implement them as microsatellite clusters using anything from magnetic attraction to one another to itty bitty winches with brushless motors to maintain relative position .
It is likely that solar power satellites would use a phased array ; there 's no reason it could n't be implemented as a cluster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find your reply inadequate.
It assumes that no solution will be found to the problem of space debris, which is probably false; if commercialization of space is intended to proceed apace (And where else will the robber barons rob next?
We're running out of stuff that's easy to rip out of the planet) this is a problem which will need to be addressed.
It also assumes that launch costs will remain fixed, which is also probably false.
It also assumes that these satellites will be as vulnerable to impact as current models, which is probably true, but not necessarily.
For example, I see no reason why they could not implement them as microsatellite clusters using anything from magnetic attraction to one another to itty bitty winches with brushless motors to maintain relative position.
It is likely that solar power satellites would use a phased array; there's no reason it couldn't be implemented as a cluster.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034080</id>
	<title>Nobody picked up the gundam 00 reference.</title>
	<author>nobodylocalhost</author>
	<datestamp>1257787380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Space elevators, orbital solar power station, and an orbital laser that can do massive damage with pin point accuracy. Just like you planned Japan, just like you planned. Now all you need is a bunch of rogue scientists building a base in a bunch of asteroids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Space elevators , orbital solar power station , and an orbital laser that can do massive damage with pin point accuracy .
Just like you planned Japan , just like you planned .
Now all you need is a bunch of rogue scientists building a base in a bunch of asteroids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Space elevators, orbital solar power station, and an orbital laser that can do massive damage with pin point accuracy.
Just like you planned Japan, just like you planned.
Now all you need is a bunch of rogue scientists building a base in a bunch of asteroids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034388</id>
	<title>What's the impact on Global Climate Change?</title>
	<author>aGuyNamedJoe</author>
	<datestamp>1257788520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I think about beaming energy from space to ground, I wonder about the impact on global warming...</p><p>The process basically increases the solar energy reaching the surface to be dissipated (eventually) into the atmosphere.  Thus it's a positive direct contribution to global warming.  What offsets that?  If it reduces greenhouse gas generation sufficiently I can see it might reduce the warming, but I never see that issue discussed.</p><p>Joe</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I think about beaming energy from space to ground , I wonder about the impact on global warming...The process basically increases the solar energy reaching the surface to be dissipated ( eventually ) into the atmosphere .
Thus it 's a positive direct contribution to global warming .
What offsets that ?
If it reduces greenhouse gas generation sufficiently I can see it might reduce the warming , but I never see that issue discussed.Joe</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I think about beaming energy from space to ground, I wonder about the impact on global warming...The process basically increases the solar energy reaching the surface to be dissipated (eventually) into the atmosphere.
Thus it's a positive direct contribution to global warming.
What offsets that?
If it reduces greenhouse gas generation sufficiently I can see it might reduce the warming, but I never see that issue discussed.Joe</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033888</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257786720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not going to happen. No use writing why AGAIN, I think this reply to the original post is just fine</p></div><p>I like a well laid out argument as anyone, but people have historically been very poor at guessing what will work and what not via dry analysis. Indeed, according to our knowledge, most of the technology and achievements we have today would never work.<br> <br>

In business there's a saying: "Never mind how well you plan, your plan will never work out. But never start without a plan". This is why it is good that some people take on a project by leap of faith, or take a risk, if you will. You never know when a small discovery may ripple into all the equations and change the balance in favor of the project.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not going to happen .
No use writing why AGAIN , I think this reply to the original post is just fineI like a well laid out argument as anyone , but people have historically been very poor at guessing what will work and what not via dry analysis .
Indeed , according to our knowledge , most of the technology and achievements we have today would never work .
In business there 's a saying : " Never mind how well you plan , your plan will never work out .
But never start without a plan " .
This is why it is good that some people take on a project by leap of faith , or take a risk , if you will .
You never know when a small discovery may ripple into all the equations and change the balance in favor of the project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not going to happen.
No use writing why AGAIN, I think this reply to the original post is just fineI like a well laid out argument as anyone, but people have historically been very poor at guessing what will work and what not via dry analysis.
Indeed, according to our knowledge, most of the technology and achievements we have today would never work.
In business there's a saying: "Never mind how well you plan, your plan will never work out.
But never start without a plan".
This is why it is good that some people take on a project by leap of faith, or take a risk, if you will.
You never know when a small discovery may ripple into all the equations and change the balance in favor of the project.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035796</id>
	<title>I'm normally a fan of Nuclear,...</title>
	<author>MJMullinII</author>
	<datestamp>1257793980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but I've been watching Solar Space Power technology over the last couple of years and must admit that it is the first truly "renewable" energy source that can give Nuclear a run for it's money.</p><p>If our Japanese friends are willing to be the Ginnie pigs, I'm betting they will have to honor of setting off a new international space race to see who is the first to receive \%100 percent of their electricity from this source.  Once the inevitable initial bugs are worked out, I mean, come one,...you're talking about *TERRAWATS* of power 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year with *no* greenhouse gas emissions at the source.</p><p>You can't tell me, no matter really how much it costs to get off the ground, that you can't make damn buckets of money off of this.  I mean, with that type of energy source, it becomes completely reasonable to manufacture Synthetic hydrocarbons (which really, at their heart, only need electricity, hydrogen, and sucking CO2 out of the air).  The main block to Synthetic Hydrocarbon fuel up till this point has been the enormous cost associated with supply the base-load energy needed to split hydrogen from Sea Water and the enormous pollution associated with producing that energy (which, in the United States at least, would most certainly be predominately from Coal).</p><p>I've long thought Nuclear would be the perfect solution to this, but am not under any illusions to the likelihood of people shedding the NIMBY syndrome anytime soon.</p><p>I just hope this doesn't become a victim of a brand-new form of "NIMBY" in the way of "What if they aim it at *my* house!"...or some such complete bulls...excuse me <i>nonsense</i>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but I 've been watching Solar Space Power technology over the last couple of years and must admit that it is the first truly " renewable " energy source that can give Nuclear a run for it 's money.If our Japanese friends are willing to be the Ginnie pigs , I 'm betting they will have to honor of setting off a new international space race to see who is the first to receive \ % 100 percent of their electricity from this source .
Once the inevitable initial bugs are worked out , I mean , come one,...you 're talking about * TERRAWATS * of power 24 hours a day , 7 days a week , 365 days a year with * no * greenhouse gas emissions at the source.You ca n't tell me , no matter really how much it costs to get off the ground , that you ca n't make damn buckets of money off of this .
I mean , with that type of energy source , it becomes completely reasonable to manufacture Synthetic hydrocarbons ( which really , at their heart , only need electricity , hydrogen , and sucking CO2 out of the air ) .
The main block to Synthetic Hydrocarbon fuel up till this point has been the enormous cost associated with supply the base-load energy needed to split hydrogen from Sea Water and the enormous pollution associated with producing that energy ( which , in the United States at least , would most certainly be predominately from Coal ) .I 've long thought Nuclear would be the perfect solution to this , but am not under any illusions to the likelihood of people shedding the NIMBY syndrome anytime soon.I just hope this does n't become a victim of a brand-new form of " NIMBY " in the way of " What if they aim it at * my * house !
" ...or some such complete bulls...excuse me nonsense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but I've been watching Solar Space Power technology over the last couple of years and must admit that it is the first truly "renewable" energy source that can give Nuclear a run for it's money.If our Japanese friends are willing to be the Ginnie pigs, I'm betting they will have to honor of setting off a new international space race to see who is the first to receive \%100 percent of their electricity from this source.
Once the inevitable initial bugs are worked out, I mean, come one,...you're talking about *TERRAWATS* of power 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year with *no* greenhouse gas emissions at the source.You can't tell me, no matter really how much it costs to get off the ground, that you can't make damn buckets of money off of this.
I mean, with that type of energy source, it becomes completely reasonable to manufacture Synthetic hydrocarbons (which really, at their heart, only need electricity, hydrogen, and sucking CO2 out of the air).
The main block to Synthetic Hydrocarbon fuel up till this point has been the enormous cost associated with supply the base-load energy needed to split hydrogen from Sea Water and the enormous pollution associated with producing that energy (which, in the United States at least, would most certainly be predominately from Coal).I've long thought Nuclear would be the perfect solution to this, but am not under any illusions to the likelihood of people shedding the NIMBY syndrome anytime soon.I just hope this doesn't become a victim of a brand-new form of "NIMBY" in the way of "What if they aim it at *my* house!
"...or some such complete bulls...excuse me nonsense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035010</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257791160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your views are criminally shortsighted. Are you so ignorant to think that 40 years from now SPS won't be economical? Even in your lifetime rocket technology will advance and make the SPS technology cheaper. I mean, haven't we humans learned that what is "impossible" today is more than likely (given a reasonable grounding in science) probable in the near future? And besides, with the climate changes and the ultimately limited supply of fossil fuels, alternative energy sources may become <em>incredibly</em> valuable and therefore justify the budget without the 100x decrease. My guess is that you're somewhere in the coal, oil, or gas business, and you are clinging desperately to your outdated livelihood.</p><p>People like you stifle invention and creativity by removing the "dream" in it. Go die and take your useless opinions with you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your views are criminally shortsighted .
Are you so ignorant to think that 40 years from now SPS wo n't be economical ?
Even in your lifetime rocket technology will advance and make the SPS technology cheaper .
I mean , have n't we humans learned that what is " impossible " today is more than likely ( given a reasonable grounding in science ) probable in the near future ?
And besides , with the climate changes and the ultimately limited supply of fossil fuels , alternative energy sources may become incredibly valuable and therefore justify the budget without the 100x decrease .
My guess is that you 're somewhere in the coal , oil , or gas business , and you are clinging desperately to your outdated livelihood.People like you stifle invention and creativity by removing the " dream " in it .
Go die and take your useless opinions with you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your views are criminally shortsighted.
Are you so ignorant to think that 40 years from now SPS won't be economical?
Even in your lifetime rocket technology will advance and make the SPS technology cheaper.
I mean, haven't we humans learned that what is "impossible" today is more than likely (given a reasonable grounding in science) probable in the near future?
And besides, with the climate changes and the ultimately limited supply of fossil fuels, alternative energy sources may become incredibly valuable and therefore justify the budget without the 100x decrease.
My guess is that you're somewhere in the coal, oil, or gas business, and you are clinging desperately to your outdated livelihood.People like you stifle invention and creativity by removing the "dream" in it.
Go die and take your useless opinions with you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036312</id>
	<title>Global warming?</title>
	<author>Cur8or</author>
	<datestamp>1257796260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wouldn't importing sunlight make global warming worse?
Or would it rather leave a load of CO2 where it lies?
(I didn't RTFA)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would n't importing sunlight make global warming worse ?
Or would it rather leave a load of CO2 where it lies ?
( I did n't RTFA )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wouldn't importing sunlight make global warming worse?
Or would it rather leave a load of CO2 where it lies?
(I didn't RTFA)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30042042</id>
	<title>Basic physics problem</title>
	<author>sean4u</author>
	<datestamp>1257784920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't the real problem with this the fact that it would be capturing solar radiation that would not otherwise intersect with the planet's atmosphere? Given the concerns about warming, isn't adding another input<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... insane? Don't get me wrong - I'm all for this, as long as they build the giant solar-powered fan and heat sink in space to go with it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the real problem with this the fact that it would be capturing solar radiation that would not otherwise intersect with the planet 's atmosphere ?
Given the concerns about warming , is n't adding another input ... insane ? Do n't get me wrong - I 'm all for this , as long as they build the giant solar-powered fan and heat sink in space to go with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the real problem with this the fact that it would be capturing solar radiation that would not otherwise intersect with the planet's atmosphere?
Given the concerns about warming, isn't adding another input ... insane? Don't get me wrong - I'm all for this, as long as they build the giant solar-powered fan and heat sink in space to go with it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034354</id>
	<title>Reading FAIL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257788460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tinfoil != Aluminum foil</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tinfoil ! = Aluminum foil</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tinfoil != Aluminum foil</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033318</id>
	<title>SimCity 2000</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257784260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember the game SimCity 2000. If you ran a city until about the year 2020, you could build a microwave power plant that did exactly this. If you entered the cheat code, "priscilla", you would get a menu full of fun new disasters. One of them was a microwave beam misdirect. When that happened, if you had a microwave power plant, about 16 squares next to it, equivalent to 64 houses, would start on fire!</p><p>However, these real life systems are actually much safer. The beam can be focused so that if it accidentally runs into something other than the power plant, nothing will happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember the game SimCity 2000 .
If you ran a city until about the year 2020 , you could build a microwave power plant that did exactly this .
If you entered the cheat code , " priscilla " , you would get a menu full of fun new disasters .
One of them was a microwave beam misdirect .
When that happened , if you had a microwave power plant , about 16 squares next to it , equivalent to 64 houses , would start on fire ! However , these real life systems are actually much safer .
The beam can be focused so that if it accidentally runs into something other than the power plant , nothing will happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember the game SimCity 2000.
If you ran a city until about the year 2020, you could build a microwave power plant that did exactly this.
If you entered the cheat code, "priscilla", you would get a menu full of fun new disasters.
One of them was a microwave beam misdirect.
When that happened, if you had a microwave power plant, about 16 squares next to it, equivalent to 64 houses, would start on fire!However, these real life systems are actually much safer.
The beam can be focused so that if it accidentally runs into something other than the power plant, nothing will happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033518</id>
	<title>Re:SimCity 2000</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1257785040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>One of them was a microwave beam misdirect.</i><br>Note that while you could only manually trigger that disaster with the help of the cheat it could also happen randomly (assuming you have "no disasters" turned off).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of them was a microwave beam misdirect.Note that while you could only manually trigger that disaster with the help of the cheat it could also happen randomly ( assuming you have " no disasters " turned off ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of them was a microwave beam misdirect.Note that while you could only manually trigger that disaster with the help of the cheat it could also happen randomly (assuming you have "no disasters" turned off).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033318</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033240</id>
	<title>Threat?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257784020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great , now we not only have to worry about stray godzilla attacks, now japan gets pew pew lasers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , now we not only have to worry about stray godzilla attacks , now japan gets pew pew lasers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great , now we not only have to worry about stray godzilla attacks, now japan gets pew pew lasers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30039928</id>
	<title>Death ray</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257769320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fans of Star Wars and Akira will know at once the not so peaceful uses of beamed power.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fans of Star Wars and Akira will know at once the not so peaceful uses of beamed power .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fans of Star Wars and Akira will know at once the not so peaceful uses of beamed power.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30042668</id>
	<title>Re:Global Warming</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257793020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Naah! Just make a big fridge and use some of the beamed power to run it. No probs!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Naah !
Just make a big fridge and use some of the beamed power to run it .
No probs !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Naah!
Just make a big fridge and use some of the beamed power to run it.
No probs!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034414</id>
	<title>frost 4ist</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257788640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">AT&T aHnd Berkeley FreeBSD used to 800 w/512 Megs of</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>AT&amp;T aHnd Berkeley FreeBSD used to 800 w/512 Megs of [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AT&amp;T aHnd Berkeley FreeBSD used to 800 w/512 Megs of [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30037566</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>Snarkalicious</author>
	<datestamp>1257758520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I take issue with the concept that great endeavors with noble ends require economic validation as stand alone projects.  Will it work in the end?  It would take a mircale and a half.  But the attendant advances to the fields of propultion, energy production and delivery, material fabrication and the like have the potential to far outstrip the short term costs of the initial failure.  And if not...screw it, at least they tried.

I know such starry eyed idealism regarding scientific endeavor is likely to get me flamed to a char-broiled crisp, but mainly by those who have greater concern for shareholder equity than anything else.

I say:  Get on with your bad selves, you magnificent Japanese bastards!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I take issue with the concept that great endeavors with noble ends require economic validation as stand alone projects .
Will it work in the end ?
It would take a mircale and a half .
But the attendant advances to the fields of propultion , energy production and delivery , material fabrication and the like have the potential to far outstrip the short term costs of the initial failure .
And if not...screw it , at least they tried .
I know such starry eyed idealism regarding scientific endeavor is likely to get me flamed to a char-broiled crisp , but mainly by those who have greater concern for shareholder equity than anything else .
I say : Get on with your bad selves , you magnificent Japanese bastards !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I take issue with the concept that great endeavors with noble ends require economic validation as stand alone projects.
Will it work in the end?
It would take a mircale and a half.
But the attendant advances to the fields of propultion, energy production and delivery, material fabrication and the like have the potential to far outstrip the short term costs of the initial failure.
And if not...screw it, at least they tried.
I know such starry eyed idealism regarding scientific endeavor is likely to get me flamed to a char-broiled crisp, but mainly by those who have greater concern for shareholder equity than anything else.
I say:  Get on with your bad selves, you magnificent Japanese bastards!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038374</id>
	<title>Re:UN/America needs to do this now</title>
	<author>sean.peters</author>
	<datestamp>1257761880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If we remain in Afghanistan to stop AQ, then getting supplies into there is hard. A big part of this is fuel for electric power. This is the ideal situation for a small 10-50 MW space generator to beam it into bases, esp. forward bases. We can cut the power to the base, if it is taken. In addition, it prevents fuel from being used as a weapon. We could easily have a small version available within 2 years.</p></div></blockquote><p>Or, we could just build the solar power stations on the ground for much more cheaply, and bomb them if overrun by the enemy.</p><blockquote><div><p>In addition, this same idea could be used in the US and other locations to beam 10 MWs into disaster locations. The ability to bring in say 1 MW into multiple locations within 1 hour would make a HUGE difference in say hurricane, earthquake, or even another 9/11.</p></div></blockquote><p>Provided that whatever disaster occurred didn't also destroy the required ground station. It's not like you're going to put up a rectenna farm in an hour.</p><p>I don't think you're serious.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we remain in Afghanistan to stop AQ , then getting supplies into there is hard .
A big part of this is fuel for electric power .
This is the ideal situation for a small 10-50 MW space generator to beam it into bases , esp .
forward bases .
We can cut the power to the base , if it is taken .
In addition , it prevents fuel from being used as a weapon .
We could easily have a small version available within 2 years.Or , we could just build the solar power stations on the ground for much more cheaply , and bomb them if overrun by the enemy.In addition , this same idea could be used in the US and other locations to beam 10 MWs into disaster locations .
The ability to bring in say 1 MW into multiple locations within 1 hour would make a HUGE difference in say hurricane , earthquake , or even another 9/11.Provided that whatever disaster occurred did n't also destroy the required ground station .
It 's not like you 're going to put up a rectenna farm in an hour.I do n't think you 're serious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we remain in Afghanistan to stop AQ, then getting supplies into there is hard.
A big part of this is fuel for electric power.
This is the ideal situation for a small 10-50 MW space generator to beam it into bases, esp.
forward bases.
We can cut the power to the base, if it is taken.
In addition, it prevents fuel from being used as a weapon.
We could easily have a small version available within 2 years.Or, we could just build the solar power stations on the ground for much more cheaply, and bomb them if overrun by the enemy.In addition, this same idea could be used in the US and other locations to beam 10 MWs into disaster locations.
The ability to bring in say 1 MW into multiple locations within 1 hour would make a HUGE difference in say hurricane, earthquake, or even another 9/11.Provided that whatever disaster occurred didn't also destroy the required ground station.
It's not like you're going to put up a rectenna farm in an hour.I don't think you're serious.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038808</id>
	<title>Re:SimCity 2000</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257763680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it can't.  RTFA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it ca n't .
RTFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it can't.
RTFA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033252</id>
	<title>So this is how...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257784020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Godzilla is made, all that microwave radiation frying the Lizard DNA...</p><p>Don't tell Japan they had it coming to them!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Godzilla is made , all that microwave radiation frying the Lizard DNA...Do n't tell Japan they had it coming to them !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Godzilla is made, all that microwave radiation frying the Lizard DNA...Don't tell Japan they had it coming to them!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033306</id>
	<title>Today's SMBC</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1257784260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Japan's just preparing for <a href="http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&amp;id=1694#comic" title="smbc-comics.com">the near future</a> [smbc-comics.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>Japan 's just preparing for the near future [ smbc-comics.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Japan's just preparing for the near future [smbc-comics.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30040502</id>
	<title>Re:I smelll a movie plot...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257772200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To your serious questions, negligible heating, no ionisation, microwaves aren't UV/X-rays/Gamma rays, on the order of 1 hectare to 1sq. km - you can walk in the beam and spend the next hour getting warm enough to sweat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To your serious questions , negligible heating , no ionisation , microwaves are n't UV/X-rays/Gamma rays , on the order of 1 hectare to 1sq .
km - you can walk in the beam and spend the next hour getting warm enough to sweat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To your serious questions, negligible heating, no ionisation, microwaves aren't UV/X-rays/Gamma rays, on the order of 1 hectare to 1sq.
km - you can walk in the beam and spend the next hour getting warm enough to sweat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30056224</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257874560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/space-power/" title="wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/space-power/</a> [wordpress.com]

This blog entry is WAY better than the one you're posting here. Why'd you post that one?</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/space-power/ [ wordpress.com ] This blog entry is WAY better than the one you 're posting here .
Why 'd you post that one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/space-power/ [wordpress.com]

This blog entry is WAY better than the one you're posting here.
Why'd you post that one?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034006</id>
	<title>UN/America needs to do this now</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1257787140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we remain in Afghanistan to stop AQ, then getting supplies into there is hard. A big part of this is fuel for electric power. This is the ideal situation for a small 10-50 MW space generator to beam it into bases, esp. forward bases. We can cut the power to the base, if it is taken. In addition, it prevents fuel from being used as a weapon. We could easily have a small version available within 2 years.<br> <br>In addition, this same idea could be used in the US and other locations to beam 10 MWs into disaster locations. The ability to bring in say 1 MW into multiple locations within 1 hour would make a HUGE difference in say hurricane, earthquake, or even another 9/11.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we remain in Afghanistan to stop AQ , then getting supplies into there is hard .
A big part of this is fuel for electric power .
This is the ideal situation for a small 10-50 MW space generator to beam it into bases , esp .
forward bases .
We can cut the power to the base , if it is taken .
In addition , it prevents fuel from being used as a weapon .
We could easily have a small version available within 2 years .
In addition , this same idea could be used in the US and other locations to beam 10 MWs into disaster locations .
The ability to bring in say 1 MW into multiple locations within 1 hour would make a HUGE difference in say hurricane , earthquake , or even another 9/11 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we remain in Afghanistan to stop AQ, then getting supplies into there is hard.
A big part of this is fuel for electric power.
This is the ideal situation for a small 10-50 MW space generator to beam it into bases, esp.
forward bases.
We can cut the power to the base, if it is taken.
In addition, it prevents fuel from being used as a weapon.
We could easily have a small version available within 2 years.
In addition, this same idea could be used in the US and other locations to beam 10 MWs into disaster locations.
The ability to bring in say 1 MW into multiple locations within 1 hour would make a HUGE difference in say hurricane, earthquake, or even another 9/11.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038432</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257762120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget - 2K gees and Mach 30.  We aren't really capable of hurtling stuff through our atmoshere that fast yet.  IIRC (which I may not), best we can do right now is about M10 before our best materials turn to putty.  Though I'll bet no one has tested amorphous steels...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget - 2K gees and Mach 30 .
We are n't really capable of hurtling stuff through our atmoshere that fast yet .
IIRC ( which I may not ) , best we can do right now is about M10 before our best materials turn to putty .
Though I 'll bet no one has tested amorphous steels.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget - 2K gees and Mach 30.
We aren't really capable of hurtling stuff through our atmoshere that fast yet.
IIRC (which I may not), best we can do right now is about M10 before our best materials turn to putty.
Though I'll bet no one has tested amorphous steels...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034434</id>
	<title>where's the tag...</title>
	<author>kj\_kabaje</author>
	<datestamp>1257788760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>whatcouldpossiblygowrong....</htmltext>
<tokenext>whatcouldpossiblygowrong... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>whatcouldpossiblygowrong....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036048</id>
	<title>Re:What's the impact on Global Climate Change?</title>
	<author>MJMullinII</author>
	<datestamp>1257795000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When I think about beaming energy from space to ground, I wonder about the impact on global warming...</p><p>The process basically increases the solar energy reaching the surface to be dissipated (eventually) into the atmosphere.  Thus it's a positive direct contribution to global warming.  What offsets that?  If it reduces greenhouse gas generation sufficiently I can see it might reduce the warming, but I never see that issue discussed.</p><p>Joe</p></div><p>Anyway you slice it, human demand for energy is only going to increase.  We all know that.</p><p>Even if the effects on Global Warming are completely neutral (which I'm not sure I agree with, but for sake of conversation...), it's still a plus in that with an unlimited amount of energy to go around, at least we won't be fighting pointless wars over our currently existing energy sources (though, I guess, having spelled it out, I can't really call them "pointless" wars,...lets say the unnecessary spending of human life for things that could be achieved in other ways,...yeah! I like that better).</p><p>Once the benefits of that begin paying off, who knows what kind of discoveries we can make when we have the time to focus our attention.  One of the biggest obstacles to space exploration is developing energy sources (both for the sustainability of the craft itself, as well as propulsion) that allow for reasonably fast transit times *and* support for the crew during the trip.  We have any number of solutions to the propulsion problem on the drawing boards right now,  but they are all pretty much fantasy because we don't have a power source that is both large enough *and* feasible to power them (while Nuclear is used for smaller craft such as the Voyager missions, you'll find building a human-sized spacecraft powered by Nuclear a tough sell in *any* climate, political or otherwise).</p><p>This could very well be the solution.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I think about beaming energy from space to ground , I wonder about the impact on global warming...The process basically increases the solar energy reaching the surface to be dissipated ( eventually ) into the atmosphere .
Thus it 's a positive direct contribution to global warming .
What offsets that ?
If it reduces greenhouse gas generation sufficiently I can see it might reduce the warming , but I never see that issue discussed.JoeAnyway you slice it , human demand for energy is only going to increase .
We all know that.Even if the effects on Global Warming are completely neutral ( which I 'm not sure I agree with , but for sake of conversation... ) , it 's still a plus in that with an unlimited amount of energy to go around , at least we wo n't be fighting pointless wars over our currently existing energy sources ( though , I guess , having spelled it out , I ca n't really call them " pointless " wars,...lets say the unnecessary spending of human life for things that could be achieved in other ways,...yeah !
I like that better ) .Once the benefits of that begin paying off , who knows what kind of discoveries we can make when we have the time to focus our attention .
One of the biggest obstacles to space exploration is developing energy sources ( both for the sustainability of the craft itself , as well as propulsion ) that allow for reasonably fast transit times * and * support for the crew during the trip .
We have any number of solutions to the propulsion problem on the drawing boards right now , but they are all pretty much fantasy because we do n't have a power source that is both large enough * and * feasible to power them ( while Nuclear is used for smaller craft such as the Voyager missions , you 'll find building a human-sized spacecraft powered by Nuclear a tough sell in * any * climate , political or otherwise ) .This could very well be the solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I think about beaming energy from space to ground, I wonder about the impact on global warming...The process basically increases the solar energy reaching the surface to be dissipated (eventually) into the atmosphere.
Thus it's a positive direct contribution to global warming.
What offsets that?
If it reduces greenhouse gas generation sufficiently I can see it might reduce the warming, but I never see that issue discussed.JoeAnyway you slice it, human demand for energy is only going to increase.
We all know that.Even if the effects on Global Warming are completely neutral (which I'm not sure I agree with, but for sake of conversation...), it's still a plus in that with an unlimited amount of energy to go around, at least we won't be fighting pointless wars over our currently existing energy sources (though, I guess, having spelled it out, I can't really call them "pointless" wars,...lets say the unnecessary spending of human life for things that could be achieved in other ways,...yeah!
I like that better).Once the benefits of that begin paying off, who knows what kind of discoveries we can make when we have the time to focus our attention.
One of the biggest obstacles to space exploration is developing energy sources (both for the sustainability of the craft itself, as well as propulsion) that allow for reasonably fast transit times *and* support for the crew during the trip.
We have any number of solutions to the propulsion problem on the drawing boards right now,  but they are all pretty much fantasy because we don't have a power source that is both large enough *and* feasible to power them (while Nuclear is used for smaller craft such as the Voyager missions, you'll find building a human-sized spacecraft powered by Nuclear a tough sell in *any* climate, political or otherwise).This could very well be the solution.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036010</id>
	<title>How are they going to power it?</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1257794820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These space platforms are going to require a lot of power, so are they going to have some kind of nuclear plant to supply the necessary power? Whatever they use, it had better be green, such as wind or water power. Maybe they could run it on methane from cows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These space platforms are going to require a lot of power , so are they going to have some kind of nuclear plant to supply the necessary power ?
Whatever they use , it had better be green , such as wind or water power .
Maybe they could run it on methane from cows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These space platforms are going to require a lot of power, so are they going to have some kind of nuclear plant to supply the necessary power?
Whatever they use, it had better be green, such as wind or water power.
Maybe they could run it on methane from cows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035502</id>
	<title>Economics</title>
	<author>benjamindees</author>
	<datestamp>1257792900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Asteroid mining for precious metals and in-situ panel production has to be the only way to make this cost-effective.  And there's no way we get all that up and running before fusion becomes viable.</p><p>The only possible advantage of space-based solar is that it can operate 24/7 and that it obviates the need for land.  The land usage issue is a non starter.  There is plenty of land.  Hell, forget land, we can use <a href="http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/floating-solar-island-concept/" title="alternativ...-news.info" rel="nofollow">oceans</a> [alternativ...-news.info] instead.  And solar thermal or a slightly smarter grid with widespread electric vehicles can easily and cost-effectively fill the storage gap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Asteroid mining for precious metals and in-situ panel production has to be the only way to make this cost-effective .
And there 's no way we get all that up and running before fusion becomes viable.The only possible advantage of space-based solar is that it can operate 24/7 and that it obviates the need for land .
The land usage issue is a non starter .
There is plenty of land .
Hell , forget land , we can use oceans [ alternativ...-news.info ] instead .
And solar thermal or a slightly smarter grid with widespread electric vehicles can easily and cost-effectively fill the storage gap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Asteroid mining for precious metals and in-situ panel production has to be the only way to make this cost-effective.
And there's no way we get all that up and running before fusion becomes viable.The only possible advantage of space-based solar is that it can operate 24/7 and that it obviates the need for land.
The land usage issue is a non starter.
There is plenty of land.
Hell, forget land, we can use oceans [alternativ...-news.info] instead.
And solar thermal or a slightly smarter grid with widespread electric vehicles can easily and cost-effectively fill the storage gap.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034424</id>
	<title>They'll need a lot of deuterium...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257788700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and the satellites are exposed to alien attack.. this isn't a very brilliant idea...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and the satellites are exposed to alien attack.. this is n't a very brilliant idea.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and the satellites are exposed to alien attack.. this isn't a very brilliant idea...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038630</id>
	<title>Re:Super Weapon</title>
	<author>3waygeek</author>
	<datestamp>1257762780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Beginnings?  It was first done almost 25 years ago, as this excellent <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089886/" title="imdb.com">documentary</a> [imdb.com] demonstrates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Beginnings ?
It was first done almost 25 years ago , as this excellent documentary [ imdb.com ] demonstrates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Beginnings?
It was first done almost 25 years ago, as this excellent documentary [imdb.com] demonstrates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035754</id>
	<title>Not going to happen!</title>
	<author>KiwiCanuck</author>
	<datestamp>1257793860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>for at least 3 reasons: The country that never sleeps because of a concentrated sunbeam from LEO. How much energy escapes while traveling down to Earth (Global Warming)? Plus this is totally weaponizable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>for at least 3 reasons : The country that never sleeps because of a concentrated sunbeam from LEO .
How much energy escapes while traveling down to Earth ( Global Warming ) ?
Plus this is totally weaponizable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for at least 3 reasons: The country that never sleeps because of a concentrated sunbeam from LEO.
How much energy escapes while traveling down to Earth (Global Warming)?
Plus this is totally weaponizable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038680</id>
	<title>If only...</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1257763080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was a way to capture the energy released in a Ha-dou-ken or tap into the energies being released by super sayien auras...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was a way to capture the energy released in a Ha-dou-ken or tap into the energies being released by super sayien auras.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was a way to capture the energy released in a Ha-dou-ken or tap into the energies being released by super sayien auras...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036188</id>
	<title>Re:UN/America needs to do this now</title>
	<author>jpmorgan</author>
	<datestamp>1257795480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Space relay for power distribution makes a lot of sense for military/emergency purposes, but not generation. Why generate the power in space, when it can just be beamed up from a ground-station? We can extract useful energy far more easily at microwave frequencies than at visible light frequencies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Space relay for power distribution makes a lot of sense for military/emergency purposes , but not generation .
Why generate the power in space , when it can just be beamed up from a ground-station ?
We can extract useful energy far more easily at microwave frequencies than at visible light frequencies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Space relay for power distribution makes a lot of sense for military/emergency purposes, but not generation.
Why generate the power in space, when it can just be beamed up from a ground-station?
We can extract useful energy far more easily at microwave frequencies than at visible light frequencies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30039498</id>
	<title>SimCity 2000</title>
	<author>lokiomega</author>
	<datestamp>1257766800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I built one of these but the fusion reactors came out just a few years later and I didn't have worry about frying half of my city.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I built one of these but the fusion reactors came out just a few years later and I did n't have worry about frying half of my city .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I built one of these but the fusion reactors came out just a few years later and I didn't have worry about frying half of my city.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035358</id>
	<title>I smelll a movie plot...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1257792420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Version A)<br>The microwaves are going to ionize the atmosphere.<br>Breaking down earth's magnetic shielding from the solar wind.<br>And then igniting the entire atmosphere.</p><p>Unless you give me... ONE...MILLION...DOLLARS!!! MUHAHAHAHAAAAA...</p><p>Version B)<br>Our power needs will go up so far, that we will fill the whole area around the sun with solar panels, and live on top of them.<br>Thereby making us invisible for any aliens.<br>So we grow, and become more and more evil and power-hungry.<br>Until we set out, to harvest other suns.<br>And the aliens on other planets see sun after sun... vanish from the sky.</p><p>"Prepare for an epic billion-year long battle!<br>In a 40-hour movie, that will burst even LOTR's time frame!<br>Now in cinemas!"</p><p>P.S.: On a more serious note: What effect does this have on the atmosphere? I'd guess somewhat the same as in a microwave: Ionization and heating. The heating won't change much, I guess, when compared to the global warming of fossil fuel power plants. But the ionization certainly has a effect. What are the long-term results of those effects?<br>And how big of a focus point on the surface are we talking about? I don't want to be at the spot where it hits when it's mis-calibrated...<br>If those questions are answered, it's a pretty good plan in my eyes. I always wondered why we erect power plants, when nature already gave us the biggest fuckin' fusion reactor one can think of! ^^<br>(Yes there are bigger stars. But try imagining them!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Version A ) The microwaves are going to ionize the atmosphere.Breaking down earth 's magnetic shielding from the solar wind.And then igniting the entire atmosphere.Unless you give me.. .
ONE...MILLION...DOLLARS ! ! ! MUHAHAHAHAAAAA...Version B ) Our power needs will go up so far , that we will fill the whole area around the sun with solar panels , and live on top of them.Thereby making us invisible for any aliens.So we grow , and become more and more evil and power-hungry.Until we set out , to harvest other suns.And the aliens on other planets see sun after sun... vanish from the sky .
" Prepare for an epic billion-year long battle ! In a 40-hour movie , that will burst even LOTR 's time frame ! Now in cinemas ! " P.S .
: On a more serious note : What effect does this have on the atmosphere ?
I 'd guess somewhat the same as in a microwave : Ionization and heating .
The heating wo n't change much , I guess , when compared to the global warming of fossil fuel power plants .
But the ionization certainly has a effect .
What are the long-term results of those effects ? And how big of a focus point on the surface are we talking about ?
I do n't want to be at the spot where it hits when it 's mis-calibrated...If those questions are answered , it 's a pretty good plan in my eyes .
I always wondered why we erect power plants , when nature already gave us the biggest fuckin ' fusion reactor one can think of !
^ ^ ( Yes there are bigger stars .
But try imagining them !
: P )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Version A)The microwaves are going to ionize the atmosphere.Breaking down earth's magnetic shielding from the solar wind.And then igniting the entire atmosphere.Unless you give me...
ONE...MILLION...DOLLARS!!! MUHAHAHAHAAAAA...Version B)Our power needs will go up so far, that we will fill the whole area around the sun with solar panels, and live on top of them.Thereby making us invisible for any aliens.So we grow, and become more and more evil and power-hungry.Until we set out, to harvest other suns.And the aliens on other planets see sun after sun... vanish from the sky.
"Prepare for an epic billion-year long battle!In a 40-hour movie, that will burst even LOTR's time frame!Now in cinemas!"P.S.
: On a more serious note: What effect does this have on the atmosphere?
I'd guess somewhat the same as in a microwave: Ionization and heating.
The heating won't change much, I guess, when compared to the global warming of fossil fuel power plants.
But the ionization certainly has a effect.
What are the long-term results of those effects?And how big of a focus point on the surface are we talking about?
I don't want to be at the spot where it hits when it's mis-calibrated...If those questions are answered, it's a pretty good plan in my eyes.
I always wondered why we erect power plants, when nature already gave us the biggest fuckin' fusion reactor one can think of!
^^(Yes there are bigger stars.
But try imagining them!
:P)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30044084</id>
	<title>Japan wants to microwave Earth??</title>
	<author>zwarte piet</author>
	<datestamp>1257857160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought we were trying to get rid of global warming.

but

Might be interesting sight if they point that thing on a cornfield.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought we were trying to get rid of global warming .
but Might be interesting sight if they point that thing on a cornfield .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought we were trying to get rid of global warming.
but

Might be interesting sight if they point that thing on a cornfield.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036596</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>mcrbids</author>
	<datestamp>1257797580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not going to happen. No use writing why AGAIN, I think this reply to the original post is just fine:</p></div><p>Plug your ears, dude, and say "LA LA LA LA LA" really loudly while I finish my post!</p><p>They said it was infeasible to have an automated car. <b>They were wrong.</b><br>They said that  flying wasn't going to happen. <b>they were wrong.</b><br>They said that "heavier than air" flying wasn't going to happen. <b>They were wrong.</b><br>They said that breaking the sound barrier wasn't going to happen. <b>They were wrong.</b><br>They said that going into space was ludicrous! <b>hey were wrong. </b><br>Going to the moon was infeasible. <b>They were wrong. </b><br>Free, global communications so cheap that there's little sense in metering it? unpossible! (<b>they were wrong here, too!</b>)</p><p>Seeing a pattern, here?</p><p>It's impractical only given the assumptions of today. But just like every single milestone above, technology improved to the point where previously impossible/infeasible/impractical feats became ordinary, even cheap and everyday. Even the disgustingly underfunded federal space program is <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6167761/" title="msn.com">now increasingly being compensated for.</a> [msn.com]</p><p>What's needed is a new technology that commoditizes space travel. Many people would point to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space\_elevator" title="wikipedia.org">Space Elevator</a> [wikipedia.org] as the answer to our dreams. But it's not really all that practical, and requires us to build super-duper long-chain nanostructures, currently infeasible.  Additionally, there's the problem of how to confer lots of energy to the elevators themselves as they travel their 11,000 mile course.</p><p>But there's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launch\_loop" title="wikipedia.org">a solution that today solves all these problems without requiring any particularly new developments</a> [wikipedia.org] - space travel can be commoditized in as little as 3-5 years, and provide a launch price of as little as $3 per kg, well under 1\% of the $12,000/pound figure stated in your linked-to article.</p><p><b>Inroduce the launch loop, and suddenly, numbers start lining up all over the place, at a cost of around 1\% of the most recent stimulus package.</b> Seriously. read up on it!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not going to happen .
No use writing why AGAIN , I think this reply to the original post is just fine : Plug your ears , dude , and say " LA LA LA LA LA " really loudly while I finish my post ! They said it was infeasible to have an automated car .
They were wrong.They said that flying was n't going to happen .
they were wrong.They said that " heavier than air " flying was n't going to happen .
They were wrong.They said that breaking the sound barrier was n't going to happen .
They were wrong.They said that going into space was ludicrous !
hey were wrong .
Going to the moon was infeasible .
They were wrong .
Free , global communications so cheap that there 's little sense in metering it ?
unpossible ! ( they were wrong here , too !
) Seeing a pattern , here ? It 's impractical only given the assumptions of today .
But just like every single milestone above , technology improved to the point where previously impossible/infeasible/impractical feats became ordinary , even cheap and everyday .
Even the disgustingly underfunded federal space program is now increasingly being compensated for .
[ msn.com ] What 's needed is a new technology that commoditizes space travel .
Many people would point to the Space Elevator [ wikipedia.org ] as the answer to our dreams .
But it 's not really all that practical , and requires us to build super-duper long-chain nanostructures , currently infeasible .
Additionally , there 's the problem of how to confer lots of energy to the elevators themselves as they travel their 11,000 mile course.But there 's a solution that today solves all these problems without requiring any particularly new developments [ wikipedia.org ] - space travel can be commoditized in as little as 3-5 years , and provide a launch price of as little as $ 3 per kg , well under 1 \ % of the $ 12,000/pound figure stated in your linked-to article.Inroduce the launch loop , and suddenly , numbers start lining up all over the place , at a cost of around 1 \ % of the most recent stimulus package .
Seriously. read up on it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not going to happen.
No use writing why AGAIN, I think this reply to the original post is just fine:Plug your ears, dude, and say "LA LA LA LA LA" really loudly while I finish my post!They said it was infeasible to have an automated car.
They were wrong.They said that  flying wasn't going to happen.
they were wrong.They said that "heavier than air" flying wasn't going to happen.
They were wrong.They said that breaking the sound barrier wasn't going to happen.
They were wrong.They said that going into space was ludicrous!
hey were wrong.
Going to the moon was infeasible.
They were wrong.
Free, global communications so cheap that there's little sense in metering it?
unpossible! (they were wrong here, too!
)Seeing a pattern, here?It's impractical only given the assumptions of today.
But just like every single milestone above, technology improved to the point where previously impossible/infeasible/impractical feats became ordinary, even cheap and everyday.
Even the disgustingly underfunded federal space program is now increasingly being compensated for.
[msn.com]What's needed is a new technology that commoditizes space travel.
Many people would point to the Space Elevator [wikipedia.org] as the answer to our dreams.
But it's not really all that practical, and requires us to build super-duper long-chain nanostructures, currently infeasible.
Additionally, there's the problem of how to confer lots of energy to the elevators themselves as they travel their 11,000 mile course.But there's a solution that today solves all these problems without requiring any particularly new developments [wikipedia.org] - space travel can be commoditized in as little as 3-5 years, and provide a launch price of as little as $3 per kg, well under 1\% of the $12,000/pound figure stated in your linked-to article.Inroduce the launch loop, and suddenly, numbers start lining up all over the place, at a cost of around 1\% of the most recent stimulus package.
Seriously. read up on it!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30043930</id>
	<title>bring it on</title>
	<author>yoprst</author>
	<datestamp>1257855120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too bad it'll never work out. The station deserves to be build for the sake of high energy beams randomly poking earth surface due to a software glitch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad it 'll never work out .
The station deserves to be build for the sake of high energy beams randomly poking earth surface due to a software glitch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad it'll never work out.
The station deserves to be build for the sake of high energy beams randomly poking earth surface due to a software glitch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035454</id>
	<title>Terminator</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257792780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What no skynet jokes yet im very disappionted in you slashdot</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What no skynet jokes yet im very disappionted in you slashdot</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What no skynet jokes yet im very disappionted in you slashdot</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034040</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>vrmlguy</author>
	<datestamp>1257787260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not going to happen. No use writing why AGAIN, I think this reply to the original post is just fine:</p><p>http://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/here-we-go-again-with-the-spss/</p></div><p>You don't seem to realize that there's more than one way to launch a payload.  Here's a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. article from 2006, for instance, that discusses ballistic launches:  <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/03/1732258" title="slashdot.org">http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/03/1732258</a> [slashdot.org].</p><p>The gist is, if you can pack things to withstand 2,000 Gs of acceleration, you can launch an object into orbit using just electricity.  Once the cargo reaches apogee, you need to adjust the orbit to one that won't re-intercept the atmosphere, but that only take a small solid fuel thruster. Here's one that is very cheap to make:  <a href="http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/091021-tw-alice-rocket.html" title="space.com">http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/091021-tw-alice-rocket.html</a> [space.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not going to happen .
No use writing why AGAIN , I think this reply to the original post is just fine : http : //matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/here-we-go-again-with-the-spss/You do n't seem to realize that there 's more than one way to launch a payload .
Here 's a / .
article from 2006 , for instance , that discusses ballistic launches : http : //science.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 06/10/03/1732258 [ slashdot.org ] .The gist is , if you can pack things to withstand 2,000 Gs of acceleration , you can launch an object into orbit using just electricity .
Once the cargo reaches apogee , you need to adjust the orbit to one that wo n't re-intercept the atmosphere , but that only take a small solid fuel thruster .
Here 's one that is very cheap to make : http : //www.space.com/businesstechnology/091021-tw-alice-rocket.html [ space.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not going to happen.
No use writing why AGAIN, I think this reply to the original post is just fine:http://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/here-we-go-again-with-the-spss/You don't seem to realize that there's more than one way to launch a payload.
Here's a /.
article from 2006, for instance, that discusses ballistic launches:  http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/03/1732258 [slashdot.org].The gist is, if you can pack things to withstand 2,000 Gs of acceleration, you can launch an object into orbit using just electricity.
Once the cargo reaches apogee, you need to adjust the orbit to one that won't re-intercept the atmosphere, but that only take a small solid fuel thruster.
Here's one that is very cheap to make:  http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/091021-tw-alice-rocket.html [space.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033616</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1257785520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I read your article, but it seems at least a few people are convinced enough to spen some serious money on this project.<br> <br>
It seems to me that a major risk might be that of the satellite being hit by some form of space junk or other material. If that didn't knock out the satellite altogether, then it occurs to me that the energy beam might end up frying something on the ground. Like, say, Japan.<br> <br>I bet that would ruin someone's whole day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I read your article , but it seems at least a few people are convinced enough to spen some serious money on this project .
It seems to me that a major risk might be that of the satellite being hit by some form of space junk or other material .
If that did n't knock out the satellite altogether , then it occurs to me that the energy beam might end up frying something on the ground .
Like , say , Japan .
I bet that would ruin someone 's whole day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read your article, but it seems at least a few people are convinced enough to spen some serious money on this project.
It seems to me that a major risk might be that of the satellite being hit by some form of space junk or other material.
If that didn't knock out the satellite altogether, then it occurs to me that the energy beam might end up frying something on the ground.
Like, say, Japan.
I bet that would ruin someone's whole day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038124</id>
	<title>Re:So this is how...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257760860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For a minute there I thought this said "AFRICA eyes solar station in space", but that would just be ridiculous...</p><p>Anybody care to tell me WHY?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a minute there I thought this said " AFRICA eyes solar station in space " , but that would just be ridiculous...Anybody care to tell me WHY ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a minute there I thought this said "AFRICA eyes solar station in space", but that would just be ridiculous...Anybody care to tell me WHY?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034002</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>asylumx</author>
	<datestamp>1257787140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Random bloggers &gt; japanese national space agency...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Random bloggers &gt; japanese national space agency.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Random bloggers &gt; japanese national space agency...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034508</id>
	<title>Super Weapon</title>
	<author>fireball84513</author>
	<datestamp>1257789000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Could this be the beginnings of a death ray? The next super-weapon?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could this be the beginnings of a death ray ?
The next super-weapon ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could this be the beginnings of a death ray?
The next super-weapon?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035290</id>
	<title>Re:Good luck with that...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1257792120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how about 'no going to happen, because the air between station and earth heats and something ill happens'?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how about 'no going to happen , because the air between station and earth heats and something ill happens ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how about 'no going to happen, because the air between station and earth heats and something ill happens'?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30037566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30056224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30042668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30040502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_09_1520226_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30040502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036048
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038630
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035290
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033616
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034696
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30037566
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034040
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30056224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30035754
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033454
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033518
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30042668
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033542
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30039498
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30033252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036754
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30034006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30038480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30036188
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_09_1520226.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_09_1520226.30042042
</commentlist>
</conversation>
