Comments

If they can keep the HST operational for over 20 years, there's no reason the ISS couldn't stay up for at least 30.. The suits at NASA better think twice about a planned 2016 de-orbit. This would be a very unwise and costly PR blunder.. Over $100 Billion spent, 15 years of construction time, and costing 7 astronauts' lives! If money's the issue, maybe the space agency should do what the Russians are doing...space tourists. They could also sell ad space on the orbiter and ISS nodes. This alone could bring in 100's of millions of dollars a year.. They would be better off cutting some Mars missions are planetary probes before axing the ISS in 2016 IMO.

I like the proposal of placing deposits on alkalines. I use rechargeables for everything. Some of his other ideas seem drastic. If manufacturers are hit with taxes or fines for producing alkalines that fail to meet specs., they would simply pass that burden on to customers in the form of higher prices. Forcing producers and users of portable power to switch to rechargeable cells with the threat of fines, fees, and such would be a last ditch effort. If there were better, cheaper, more eco-friendly ways to make battery cells; companies would be doing it. Improved technology and breakthroughs in science will improve upon portable power. It may be in the form of an improved lithium-ion battery, or a fuel cell, or something like that.