The idea of people moving from city to city floating safely in lighter than air vehicles has been around for decades, look at old concept drawings of the Empire State Building and you will see mock ups of airships docking at the top of the tower. An awesome concept, alas, that darn Hindenburg just had to explode and destroy people's sense of safety associated with traveling by lighter than air vessels. Now almost 80 years after the Hindeburg disaster lighter than air vehicles are starting to have a renaissance, with companies like Aeroscraft and Skylifter, are working to develop their own unique technological solutions. While these new solutions are cool, we need something crazier, a component that would allow us to really push the boundaries of what we can design, we need a lighter than air solid. Imagine a material so light that when you let go of it at sea level, it starts to float away, and unlike helium balloons from a birthday party, this material will never lose its buoyancy. While there are, probably, many potential ways to create a lighter than air material, one solution could potentially involve a sheet of graphene wrapped around a volume of molecular hydrogen held at atmospheric pressure. The graphene exterior would keep the hydrogen for years without letting any gas escape, the hydrogen would provide a counter pressure to the outside environment, ensuring that the "balloon" did not require some kind of internal mechanical support.
If lighter than air solid could be made, the applications are legion. Initially only the military and high cost research organizations would be likely to to afford this technology. For the military, drone reconnaissance systems that would never need to land. After disasters other models could provide communication relay services and remote sensing, aiding in finding the missing. As the cost for a kilogram of lighter than this lighter than air solid went down the use cases would grow. hybrid lift air ships could be developed, the traditional cigar shapes with wings would slowly disappear. When costs became lower still, new renewable energy solutions become possible, similar to the Altaeros flying wind-turbine design, we could build floating solar and wind arrays, generating power almost continuously. These energy platforms would serve forward operating bases, research stations, and disaster recovery. What would be more exciting is what technology like this would mean for space exploration on planets like Venus, there are already proposals to create research stations for humans that would float in the Venusion atmosphere, with lighter than air solids, we could potentially build massive structures of permanent habitation, harvesting useful chemicals from the thick Venusion atmosphere. Eventually the wealthy would start building floating sky yachts, not nearly as fast their private jets, but far more luxurious. Further into the future, floating gardens, gently scrubbing out surplus carbon dioxide and other pollutants from the atmosphere.
There are probably other applications, the real question would be, how much does it cost for a given amount of lift. The Earth's atmosphere has a density of about 1.2 kg/m^3, that means if you wanted to lift 1 kg into the air and the lighter than air material had a density of 1 kg/m^3, you would need roughly 6 cubic meters of lifting material. The lighter the solid the less volume you would need to displace. I am betting that the most representative unit of measure would be $/kg of lift. Comparing this number against alternatives is a more complex life time cost calculation, that I cannot realistically approximate at this time.
I hope you enjoyed the article. Please feel free to comment, ask questions provide feedback.
If lighter than air solid could be made, the applications are legion. Initially only the military and high cost research organizations would be likely to to afford this technology. For the military, drone reconnaissance systems that would never need to land. After disasters other models could provide communication relay services and remote sensing, aiding in finding the missing. As the cost for a kilogram of lighter than this lighter than air solid went down the use cases would grow. hybrid lift air ships could be developed, the traditional cigar shapes with wings would slowly disappear. When costs became lower still, new renewable energy solutions become possible, similar to the Altaeros flying wind-turbine design, we could build floating solar and wind arrays, generating power almost continuously. These energy platforms would serve forward operating bases, research stations, and disaster recovery. What would be more exciting is what technology like this would mean for space exploration on planets like Venus, there are already proposals to create research stations for humans that would float in the Venusion atmosphere, with lighter than air solids, we could potentially build massive structures of permanent habitation, harvesting useful chemicals from the thick Venusion atmosphere. Eventually the wealthy would start building floating sky yachts, not nearly as fast their private jets, but far more luxurious. Further into the future, floating gardens, gently scrubbing out surplus carbon dioxide and other pollutants from the atmosphere.
There are probably other applications, the real question would be, how much does it cost for a given amount of lift. The Earth's atmosphere has a density of about 1.2 kg/m^3, that means if you wanted to lift 1 kg into the air and the lighter than air material had a density of 1 kg/m^3, you would need roughly 6 cubic meters of lifting material. The lighter the solid the less volume you would need to displace. I am betting that the most representative unit of measure would be $/kg of lift. Comparing this number against alternatives is a more complex life time cost calculation, that I cannot realistically approximate at this time.
I hope you enjoyed the article. Please feel free to comment, ask questions provide feedback.
No comments:
Post a Comment