Michigan has only one container-capable port, the port of Monroe, shown below. It’s small, connected to Lake Erie via a channel that’s 500 ft wide but only 21 feet deep. This is OK for handling Great Lakes, wide-bottom rafts and some shallow draft barges, but it is too shallow to handle ocean going vessels, or even larger Great Lakes ships. The only way Port Monroe takes containers is by pushing them onto rafts that are then drawn by tug, typically to Canada. The port has been neglected due to a belief, popular with Michigan Democrats, that fast rail traffic is the future success, while ports are the past. This is a popular belief in Europe, Japan, and China, but planes, cars, and ships make more sense in the US I think, in part because of regulations that prevent rail-carried mail. A nice thing about planes and ships is we don’t buy land, nor maintain tracks.
In term of price per pound mile, ships are vastly cheaper than any other system, especially big ships. But big ships need deep water ports, ideally ports with good road (or rail) connections, and good connections to the sea. Monroe has good road and rail connections, and Detroit does too. Detroit is an obvious city for a hub, centrally located on the narrows between the US and Canada, but Detroit has no port infrastructure currently, and shows no interest in adding any. That leaves Monroe, pretty bad, but better than nothing.
The port of Monroe, MI, is a bulker port, mostly and handles no ferries or cruise ships. Some few containers leave by barge. The shallow channel is part of the problem. Picture from the Detroit News.
I would like to see the Port Monroe improved, with cranes and more storage area, and with the channel deepened to handle seaway – max vessels of 27 feet draft so we could handle ocean- cargo business, and cruise ships — a ferry would be nice too. With an improved Michigan port, our exports would not have to be trucked to New York for shipment, and we would be able to import machinery and steel without it having to stop in New York, or Montreal. The lack of a decent port is why Detroit is the most expensive major US city in terms of the cost of international trade.
Monroe has the space for improvement, and they got a recent USDoT grant of $15 million to improve. It’s covered the building of a new dock, and is expect to provide for some berths for Coast Guard ships and tugs (needed). With the new dock, there’s rumors that Monroe could be a decent way to export windmills components and other items that are too large for bridges and unsuitable to major ships. We’ll see how things develop.
I’ve come to discover that we have a major helium shortage. Helium is used in semiconductor manufacture, in MRIs, chemical chromatography, and low temperature refrigeration. I need it for leak checking, something we just started doing, a quality assurance test for our products and now a service. I’m not hit hard by the shortage, but some other industries are.
For gas chromatography, helium can be replaced by hydrogen, as discussed here. I was recently invited to a seminar on it. Hydrogen gives sharper peaks than helium, and slightly quicker residence times, but it has to be very pure. As it happens, We make hydrogen purifiers at REB Research, it’s our main product. These purifiers allow you to do chromatography, or brazing with low-cost, bottled hydrogen, and even with electrolysis hydrogen. The purifier is a one-time purchase, and then you can use low cost hydrogen. You will want to vent the output of the chromatograph; you use very little for chromatography, or brazing, ~50 cc/min typically, but without some venting, it can build up eventually.
Helium monument Amarillo
Some testers have begun using natural gas for leak checking, I notice. It’s not a sensitive, and you have to make sure you’re vented so there isn’t a flame. A safer alternative is forming gas: 5% hydrogen in nitrogen. The leak sensitivity is low, well below that with helium, but above smoke, or smelly compounds.
A major cause of the helium draught is Biden’s sale, with congressional approval, June 24, 2024 of the Federal Helium Reserve. This was a massive underground stockpile of helium, 32 billion cubic feet, that filled a set of caverns that span three states. We’d managed the stockpile for years, with a monument too, see right, but Biden sold the entire reserve including 425 miles of piping, purifiers, and caverns to Messer LLC, a German company owned in China. See an NBC article about the sale, here. The price was $460 million, less than 1¢ per cubic foot of He, with the pipes, storage area, and purification facility thrown in for free. Messer LLC quickly sold off the helium to recoup their purchase, and now it’s gone.
The sale of the reserve would not have been so bad, but in March, the Iranian Revolutionary guard bombed Qatar’s Ras Laffan natural gas and helium plant, the world’s largest helium plant, doubling the spot price of helium, see. AP article here. Why does Iran, a Shia-Islamic republic, bomb plants in Qatar, another Shia Islamic republic? it’s a form of economic war. Russia is another major gas and helium producer, and I expect Ukraine will bomb Russia’s plants too. If you use helium for chromatography, you might want to switch to hydrogen, and invest in a purifier from REB Research.
Canada is poor relative to the US as I discussed in a previous post. Though they have lots of available land, home prices are very high, much higher than in the US because of regulations and fees. Similarly, it is hard to start a business in Canada, and salaries are lower. Again the major problems appear to be regulations and taxes. The Western Provences, Alberta, British Columbia, and Saskatchewan complain regularly that their interests are being ignored. So, earlier this year, Alberta’s legislature approved a referendum for separation from Canada. Independence! In part the reason is that Albertans find they are financing the rest of Canada. Independence is something that Quebec attempted Canada some 30 years ago. There the “exit” vote lost by a mere 0.6%, and the argument to stay was mostly economic: Quebec needed Canada’s money. Alberta does not. It funds Quebec and every other Provence of Canada.
Trump praised Alberta’s decision to Canada’s dismay. Some Albertans want to want to join the US, a fulfillment of James Knox Polk’s vision. It may not be legal, though. Alberta judge, Shaina Leonard declared Alberta separation unconstitutional as “secession from Canada will have an impact” on native groups. Why this is different from Quebec, I don’t know. The Alberta legislature is now preparing for a referendum on whether Alberta should “commence the legal process … to hold a binding provincial referendum”. This is a referendum on whether to have a referendum.
Currently Alberta is the only Provence that puts in more to the federal government than it takes out, and the disparity is huge. The Provence of Alberta has more oil than most oil countries, more that Iraq, Kuwait, or Norway, for example. It currently produces ~4.1 million barrels of oil per day. Valued at the current world rate of $100/bbl, that’s about $150 billion per year. If you divide by 5 million Albertans, the oil revenue alone is ~$30,000 per man woman or child, or $100,000 per voter. To this you can add bountiful natural gas, other minerals, and a strong industry, and you see a lot of info e that federal Canada “redistributes” east. Because of Canada’s parliamentary system Alberta has virtually no rights. Each vote is counted equally, and almost every one in Canada believes Albertans should not keep their bonanza. The central Canadian government provides programs, it’s true, healthcare with long waits and medical-assisted suicide. They also policed face masks for truckers, taking away the truckers savings and trucks if Canada found the mandates were being ignored.
Canada’s liberal politicians blast Albertans for being racist and stingy. They spend widely and run a deficit, about 15% of tax income despite the money taken from stingy Alberta. And despite this spending, managed to put Canada into recession, the only G7 country in recession, currently. Canadians are poorer than US citizens, with lower wages, and higher home prices, and Canada looking to China as an ally. I would suggest, instead, fewer regulations and less spending as Albertans want. If Alberta leaves, the rest of Canada will be bankrupt.
Current odds are against Albertans’ separation from Canada, but Quebec almost left, and the economic argument for leaving was non existent. Quebec was taking money from the rest of Canada when the Quebec separation vote came 30 years ago, and even so non-secession won by a mere 0.6%. Economically Alberta is more than self sufficient, and culturally Alberta is so like the US that it could join us easily, or relatively so. A vote for separation, if it were allowed to take place, could easily result in separation.
Pearl of the Seas, one of several Great Lakes cruise companies.
The Great Lakes system presents a growing summer cruise opportunity, relatively untraveled, but so far relatively expensive. There’s great scenery, including Niagara Falls, Mackinac, Painted Rocks, Chicago, and the Soo Locks: interesting sites, and the options are growing. As a cheaper alternative, as interesting, IMHO, is the lower Saint Lawrence seaway, including Quebec City, Montreal, Portland and Prince Edward Island, leaving from Boston, NYC, or Philadelphia.
The 2026 Great Lakes season includes seven cruise lanes and 10 largish ships and 7 cruise lines, up from six lines and eight ships in 2025. Major lines include Viking, Pearl Seas, Ponant, and American Cruise Lines who provide over 800 port visits in 2026, up from 700 in 2025. The largest of the Great Lakes ships are smaller than those for Alaska and the Caribbean cruises, but more luxurious. On the St Lawrence, the ships are bigger, the prices lower, and you get more or less what you’d expect on an Alaska cruise, with an open bar, typically.
Viking Oceanis
The cost differences are more than I would expect, but coming down, I expect. Currently, a nine-day Great Lakes cruise from a Viking Oceanis cruise from Cleveland costs a minimum of $8,675 per person. The 14-day version in the map above costs $14,270+. Details: https://l.cleveland.com/g2f86w. By comparison, a Boston to Quebec City cruise costs about $1200 per person, similar to a one week European or Alaska tour, on average.
I put the blame for the high cost of Great Lakes cruising on the size limits of the locks on the St Lawrence canal and on the Niagara Falls, Welland Canal: 740 feet (225.5 m) in length, 78 feet (23.8 m) in width (beam), and 26.5 feet (8.08 m) of depth (draft). The largest cruise ship now operating on the Great Lakes, the Viking Oceanis, show above measures 665 feet (205 meters) length, by 77 feet (23.5 meters) width, by 19 feet, 8″ draft, barely smaller than the canal. It boasts a capacity for 378 guests and 256 crew members. By contrast, the Norwegian Jewel, a popular ship for the New York and Boston to Quebec City route holds 2,870 passenger and a crew of about 1,069. This explains some of the price difference but not all. The rest, perhaps is competition. A standard European cruise ship can be rerouted to the St. Lawrence, but not to the Great Lakes.
Aerial Norwegian Jewel
Norwegian Jewel – Norwegian Cruise Line
If one wanted to run a large cruise ship on the Great Lakes, it would have to be built there. It could be done, but isn’t currently. We make very large ore carriers that operate entirely on the Great Lakes, so the capacity exists. The other alternative would be to expand one of the canals. IF this were done, there would be a lot more competition and ships, and we could be served by much larger container ships as well. An unfortunate aspect of the small lock size of the Welland and upper St. Lawrence is that currently, only very small container ships can enter or leave the Great Lakes. The result is that cargo prices are much higher than for any of the US coastal ports or the Mississippi. Both the US and Canada would benefit from a larger connection to the sea.
Our helium leak detector being calibrated with a standardized He leak
We just got a new helium leak detector, a Varian 938, about 15 years old, shown at right. Our old detector, a Veeco, had not worked well for years, and then we could no longer get it fixed. For a while we outsourced our leak checking, and on rush jobs it didn’t always get done. Now we can check everything in-house at much better sensitivity than before.
It used to be that helium leak checking services were common locally, in Detroit, but we lost a lot of manufacturing and our quality checkers left too, for Ohio, then abroad. Companies that used to do He leak checking switched to fluorescent die checking, which isn’t as good, and then stopped checking altogether. But small cracks at welds are not uncommon, particularly with laser welding of stainless steel. They form as the metal cools, and are too small to see. They show up in helium leakage through the micro-cracks, and if not detected and corrected, these cracks will grow and destroy a pipe or system over time. For my products, hydrogen purifiers, the micro cracks affect hydrogen purity. Any crack that helium can get through will allow impurities to diffuse into our output hydrogen. Because of the problems of micro-leaks and durability, it used to be obligatory in the nuclear navy to helium leak check every part.
The picture above was taken while calibrating our new helium leak detector. I’d bought some calibrated sources, in this case, one certified to bleed at 3.6×10-8 cc/sec, which is equivalent to 2.1 x 10-9 slpm. If a leak of that rate would appear in one of my 1 slpm purifiers, that would imply a delivered hydrogen purity of 99.999998%, and that’s generally the purity limit I certify. This is also a common leak standard in the industry, but my new detector is better than that standard. We can test down to 0.5×10-9cc/s . A 1 slpm purifier with that leak rate will deliver hydrogen at 99.9999999+ purity, more than nine-nines, as they say. On the calibration day, above, I tested three new purifiers, and found they were all perfect to the higher standard, ≤ 0.5×10-9cc/s. I’m so happy with this, I thinking of going into free-lance, helium leak checking. There’s no one local who does it.
In case you want to know, I bought this detector on eBay but found it didn’t work. I tried cleaning key parts, replaced the pump oil, nothing helped. Then bought another leak detector, with a spare filament, but without a pump or a mass-spec unit. It included the standard leaks that I now use to calibrate. That one didn’t work in the same way that the original one didn’t; we never reached pressure, and the filament never came on. Eventually, I came to believe that the vacuum pump was a fault. I sent it to a great pump repair shop in Greentown, PA, and discovered they also repair helium leak detectors. I hope to visit them. They replaced the pump and spiffed up my detector at a decent prices ($1500 as I recall). Now, it works like a charm.
CNN comparison of heavy lift, US rockets. Boeing’s SLS is not shown.
Blue Origin had its third New Glenn flight last week, and though it wasn’t quite successful, in that the satellite failed to reach proper orbit, it was successful in that it launched, reached space, and returned to a barge. It had a larger faring than even Falcon Heavy, and in terms of payload and price per ton, it beat SpaceX’s main vehicle, the Falcon 9. A SpaceX Falcon 9 flight will cost you $72 million with a weight limit to LEO of 17,400 kg. By contrast, New Glenn flights are priced at $80 million with more than double the weight limit to LEO, 45,000 kg. The price per Kg is less than half, and the faring is bigger. What’s not to like?
For now SpaceX products still retain an edge. The Falcon Heavy will lift more weight to LEO than the New Glenn (one launched today), at an even lower price per kg. Besides, SpaceX’s products are reliable, they’ve launched 240 commercial flights in the last 16 months alone, and all were successful. Blue Origin is still viable in that they’re relatively cheap and fill an important gap in SpaceX’s size portfolio, but they’re not a SpaceX killer. On the other hand they seem like a killer of Boeing’s two space projects, the CST Starliner, and the Boeing SLS that launched Artemis earlier this month.
United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan rocket pairs two Blue Origin engines in the lower stage with as many as six solid booster engines from Teledyne.
CST Starliner is Boeing’s space capsule. It was vastly over budget and behind schedule. And when the first semi-successful version reached the Space Station with Astronauts in 2024, it showed multiple malfunctions and was condemned to return to earth unmanned. The astronauts were rescued in a SpaceX Dragon. NASA will want an alternative to Dragon, but now Blue Origin provides one. It’s the same story with Boeing’s SLS. Like the capsule, it was vastly delayed and over budget. While it provided the lift for Artemis II, that was after a near four year delay since Artemis I, November, 2022. The price per kg to launch on SLA is $37,000/kg, about twenty times that of a launch on Falcon Heavy or New Glenn. The only justification for SLS, as I see it, is that it was the main alternative to SpaceX. Now it isn’t. For more on the comparison, see here.
Both SpaceX and Blue Origin have newer versions for reusable heavy lifting due to debut within the year. SpaceX hopes to launch their Starship V3 next month. If it works as predicted, the throw weight will be triple that of New Glenn at a fraction of the cost per kg. Blue Origin has a larger version of New Glenn in the works, the 9×4 also reusable. Blue Origin has also started supplying high efficiency methane-burning engines for the Vulcan Centaur rockets made by ULA (United Launch Alliance). ULA continues to make the Atlas V rocket, but these are powered by Russian RD180 engines aided by Teledyne solid boosters. The Russian contract ended after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and ULA’s supply is almost exhausted. Since 2025 ULA has flown two missions successfully using Blue Origin’s, BE-4 engines instead, aided as before, by Teledyne boosters. The price per kg on these Vulcan Centaur rockets is well below that of the old Atlas V, because with BE-4 they can reuse the lift stage. For all of these, the price is far below a flight on Boeing SLS.
The French too have improved their Ariene line. They’re now reusable, and while they’re somewhat expensive, and can’t lift as much as the New Glenn, Falcon Heavy, or Vulcan, they’re cheaper than Atlas V, and are an alternative for deep space projects. With these alternatives I see little value in continuing with Boeing’s SLS. When I look for a path to the moon and beyond, I look to Starship and perhaps New Glenn.
Our war with Iran is now a month old and the press is already calling it lost. They see Americans dead, and allies angry, but no value in the removal of a supreme leader who’d been trying to killing Americans for years, and who’d enriched enough uranium, at 60% to make 11 atom bombs. With our European and Chinese “allies” they see no pressing problem inIran’s space program where the missiles are emblazoned, “Death to USA”, or so they claim. Instead they claim our war is illegal, immoral and damaging. They call for a quick (immediate) end to the war (that is, we stop fighting) and refuse to cooperate in opening the straight of Hormuz, saying it’s not their war, though their ships, some 3200 of them are trapped in the Persian Gulf. Some “allies” have even closed their airspace in protest.
In fact, I suspect that the leadership in China and in Europe are glad to see Iran’s A-bomb project impeded, but who knows. They like to bee seen meeting with Iranian leaders, as Chairman Xi below in January 2026, then attacking the US as reactionary. Iran’s gulf neighbors are less happy with Iran because of the attacks. Even Shia Qatar has complained. Though they have not said so, I suspect most are against Iran’s proxy attacks in the Red Sea (straight of Mandab). China benefits from a non-nuclear war, and keeps sending Iran missile fuel and components in support of Iran’s proletarian government that enforces religion and kills Americans and Iranians, and that traps ships in the Persian Gulf. China benefitted from Iran’s sanctions, as they got cheaper oil, and I can see they’d like this to continue. European leaders just want cheap oil, and to be considered as tolerant, peace makers.
Chairman Xi visits Iran in January 2026, photo from the Independent.
My take, I feel bad for the sailors on these ships, some American, but to my mind, the current state of war is better than the state of peace before it, with continuous proxy attacks, and is far better than the atomic war that could follow. I like peace, but don’t see that happening quicker if we stop bombing Iran, nor quicker than a year from now, even with booming Iran. Iran’s mullahs have distributed power, allowing them to hang on indefinitely, if we let them, and our European friends seem intent to promote Iran’s mullah-leadership, such as it is, at least for now. In a year or so, I suspect that will change, but who knows?
So far, no one is suffering greatly. Gasoline is about 30% more expensive, about $3.95 per gallon today in Michigan, but that’s 50¢/gal cheaper than under Biden. European prices are up a similar percent, not welcome, but not high historically. They would go down if Europe would drill or reopen its nuclear and coal plants, or if European leaders would sign Trump’s trade deal that the UK rejected in the most embarrassing, demonstrative way. I don’t expect any signatures in the next few months — there even an anti conference. In a year they’ll sign, or decide to reopen nuclear plants, or maybe the war will be over. Supposedly this war will take 0.5% off of the GDP of the US, Europe, and China, a cheap price for peace IMHO, far less than the Ukraine war.
Trump has asked for European help opening the straight, in part because help is needed, but in part because it would be a sign to Europe’s citizens, that their leaders stand with us and NATO. Trump teases European leaders over their unwillingness to protect their own ships, and seems willing to let oil prices stay high to pressure Europe, China, and the Mid-east. For now, China does not seem ready for direct war, and seems wi, too seems willing to draw-down its oil reserves, as a way to blunt inflation at home, and promote cheap products abroad. All this is good, it’s a version of peace that should lead to a longer peace after the straight is open. Even poor Canada benefits, for now.
Robert E. Buxbaum, April 7, 2026. I don’t expect anything of an oil deal or a defense deal during King Charles’s visit in 3 weeks, nor during Trump’s visit to China, but who knows.
Canada has long-standing economic problems relative to the US, and they have been growing since 2015 as the figure shows (figure from a conservative, Canadian politician, Ryan Williams). These problems infect most of Europe, and will soon extend to the US. They are largely due to a declining birthrate, bad management, and an aging population. The result is a declining Canadian dollar (CAD), rising housing prices, rising national health costs and rising government debt. In both countries, life feels less affordable than in previous years, but the effects hit harder in Canada. Consider, for example, that the average salary in Toronto, Canada’s largest city, is $62,050 CAD. that’s pretty low by US standards, the equivalent of $45,000 US, well below the average salary in Chicago or Houston, two comparable US cities. In those cities the average is ~$63,000 US. Meanwhile rent prices in Toronto are about the same as in Chicago in US dollars, and far above rent prices in Houston. If you wish to buy a home, the price in Chicago is about half that in Toronto. Even with healthcare, life is generally more affordable in the US, and home ownership, though difficult, is not out of reach, especially in Houston.
Image generated by (for) Ryan Williams, a Conservative Canadian politician. It overstates the problems caused by Trudeau. Canada first began falling behind in the 1980s, though problems increased in 2015.
A main reason that Canadian housing is so expensive is permitting is difficult. Canada has plenty of space for housing, but it’s hard to get a permit to build, and it’s hard to sell the home, too. To be a real-estate agent in Canada, for example, you have to take a year-long course, and pass several stages of permitting tests costing $6000 -$10,000 CAD. In the US, it’s cheaper, about $1000 US and generally it requires only a month-long course. These same regulations also cause salaries to be low, by decreasing productivity. It is hard to start a company in Canada, and hard to retain good workers, since low-productivity workers have rights to equal pay for equal work, with no regard to productivity.
Canadian salaries also suffer from high immigration, particularly of low skill labor. Canada accepts about 500,000 immigrants per year, offering free healthcare and social services. During the Biden years, we accepted 6x more, about 3 million per year, mostly illegally, but Canada has 1/8 the population of the US and more generous benefits. As a result the decrease in affordability has been far greater. In the US and Canada, immigrants have been low skill or unemployed, presenting tough competition for native-born, low-skill workers, and burdening the government welfare system. There has been a push-back in Canada, as in the US, and Canada has begun removing illegal immigrants, as have we in the US. It’s less unpopular in Canada because Canadians see themselves as good no matter what they do. The Canadian population shrank by 0.15% last year, while ours continued to grow. In both countries, lower immigration of unemployed individuals, should lower housing prices, and should protect the welfare system. Of course some businesses benefit from low wage immigrant, and from the unemployed, the social services industry for one, Janitorial services for another. Rich folks are alway s complaining for more immigration because they find it’s hard to get cleaning help, and because they rarely pay taxes at any meaningful rate.
As a band-aide to these economic problems, both in Canada and the US, we have caught to raise government income through a new tax, tariffs. We’ve each put 25% tariffs on automobiles produced in the neighboring country. But Canada has a twist, it can benefit bringing bringing in high-tariff and prohibited imports from China and Cuba hoping the imports cross the border to the US. For example, they import Cuban cigars, and sell them near the border at inflated prices to Americans (largely) who smuggle them to the US. It worked too during prohibition for whiskey. In the last month, Canadian PM Carney reduced the tariff on 50,000 China-made EVs to 6.1%. If large numbers find their way to the US as new or used vehicles, the hope is that Chinese companies will buy manufactured goods from Canada, or evenest up manufacturing. It might work, though Cuba never set up cigar manufacturing in Canada. Typically Chinese companies send abroad nearly finished items, allowing the host country to add finishing touches that involve no technology but that can be claimed to raise the value significantly to avoid taxes. As the chart above, China imports from Canada are virtual all raw goods: food, petroleum, iron ore, gold… Technological expertise stays at home. Canada will need a home grown engine to get out of its funk.
At this point, the most likely home-grown engine is likely to be oil. Canada has oil, and the world needs it, especially China. Currently the Straight of Hormuz is effectively closed because of the war. Many countries are being hurt by this, but particularly China because of troubles in three of its major, sanctioned suppliers, Iran, Venezuela, and Russia. China will need a new source of oil, and will likely pay Canadian prices if the Canadian government can see through to provide infrastructure for export. Selling to China could also avoid a war.
Another thought, both to benefit Canada and the US, I’m pro-immigration, but suggest we target hard working, honest immigrants with usable skills: plumbers, cooks, programmers, cement workers … people who are unlikely to start out on welfare, and likely to provide a decent middle class lifestyle. The children from these immigrants integrate well in the US, and likely will into Canada. They integrate far better than the children of unskilled violent refugees. I also favor tariffs, especially on manufactured and luxury goods, like cars and wine. It provides government income, and promotes technical skill at home.
Jeff Bezos’s “Blue Alchemist” program recently got $25M from NASA to develop moon-based solar cell manufacturing on earth. See article here. The idea sort of makes sense to me: instead of transporting solar cells to the moon from earth, why not make them on the moon in bulk. Even light solar cells would weigh about 1kg/kW, making cells on the moon would reduce the effective weight per kW by a factor of 100 it is predicted, see figure. Given a need for megawatts of power, and the high cost to transport things to the moon, $1M/kg currently, this may make sense for the not super-distant future. Moon-made solar cells could reduce the cost per kW on the moon from $1million currently, to a mere $10,000/kW, cheap by moon prices, though super expensive by earth standards.
Elon Musk, perhaps out of envy or long-range vision, wants to go far further. He” recently’s posted’s proposed, at length a plan to launch moon-made solar cells into space along wit moon-made AI chips, with all this done to power AI centers in space, orbiting the earth or moon, see him discuss it here. He notes that “It’s always sunny in space”, so this electricity should be cheap. I don’t consider even moon-solar at $10,000/kW cheap, and power from these moon-launched cells will be pricer yet.
The reason all this makes sense to Musk is that he avoids the disruptions of solar power that come at night-time, and he avoids regulatory boards. He argues that there is no real alternative! given that power on earth is too hard and expensive, and complains that regulators oppose new power plants. I suspect there are some over-regulations, but some regulations are necessary, and I doubt he’ll avoid by going to space. As for the high cost of power, it’s really cheap in China, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran…Just look att he figure below showing the electric cost of bitcoin harvesting around the world. China runs on nuclear power or coal, delivering large-scale electricity at ~ 2¢/kWh. You can make power at a similar cost if you build your own plant, many of the bit-coin folks operate that way. It’s not exactly cheap, but a known technology, and cheaper than space solar amortized to less than 50 years.
AI chip-making is hard to do, even on earth, requiring water, chemicals, equipment and technical attention. Most companies can’t do it; China has barely cracked the technology. Doing it on the moon adds unnecessary difficulties: water and chemicals scarce, skilled servicing labor is hard to find. At some point, the moon and Mars community will want to make AI in space, but before that, they’ll want to make simpler things, like rice cookers. Until we have a fairly large community on the moon, why now make AI chips on earth. If he’s looking for practice, Musk could manufacture in a place that’s inhospitable, but more accessible than the moon: Greenland or Antarctica or the top of Everest. These locations are wam compared to the moon, and they have air and water, and I suspect electricity on Everest is cheaper than on the moon.
Operating AI centers in space is not particularly attractive, by the way. Chips have a tendency to flake-out in space because of cosmic radiation and stronger electromagnetic fields (EM). For this to work at all, chips have to be built specially robust, with correction software that must be particularly active, and you must shield everything from EM to a much greater extent than on earth.
I suspect the reason Musk wants to manufacture AI in space, and to operate there, is to over-shadow Bezos’s solar cell factory, and show off his own (Tesla) technology. Also to have a use for his Starships lifting heavy complicated things. It’s not a plan I would back.
I’ve written a fair amount about sewage over the years, including the benefits of small dams, and problems of combined sewers, but I thought I’d write here about something really fundamental: sewage has two components, poop and rain, and they should be kept separate. The poop and related liquids are known as sanitary sewage. Ideally it is the treated, saved and used as fertilizer. Rain, known as storm sewage, needs to go to the rivers at a controlled speed, unmixed with sanitary sewage. Sorry to say, in many counties, mine included, the two are mixed following every rain, costing us unnecessary money, and making swimming unsafe, and boating (sometimes) unpleasant.
Our system is not quite mixed, but is semi-separate. It only mixes in a “big” rain, more than 1/2″, something that happens once per month, on average. The Pipes are semi-connected as shown below.
Combined sewer system, like in our county, Oakland MI. We use little dams in the pipe system to semi-separate the flows. Here, showing a rain-induced overflow of combined sewage, a CSO.
The pipes of a sanitary sewage system can be relatively small in diameter as this flow is continuous, but never that large. The cost of treatment is high, per gallon though. Some of this cost can be recovered in fertilizer value.
Stormwater flow, by contrast, requires big pipes because the flow, while episodic and be 10,000 more than the sanitary flow. A city can go for weeks without storm flow as there’re is no rain. A storm will then drop more water in an hour than all the sanitary sewage of the last few weeks. You need large diameter stormwater pipes, and you typically want retention basins so that even these pipes are not overwhelmed, and to provide a little settling. The pipes should direct storm water to the nearest river. In our county we mixed the two for historical reasons. This adds tremendously to the cost of sewage treatment, and we find we regularly overwhelm the treatment facility. When this happens, as shown above, sanitary sewage is flushed into the riveras I described ten years ago in a post focussed on pollution from combined sewers. If the rains are really heavy, they back up “sanitary” sewage into basements as well. More commonly, once or twice a month where I live, we just pollute the river. Several cities with combined sewers have separated them recently. Paris, for example, ahead of the 2024 Summer Olympics.
To get an idea of the relative size of the flows in our county, note that Oakland county is a square 30 miles by 30 miles. That’s 900 square miles, or 25.1 billion square feet. In th4e event of a, not uncommon, 2″ rain on this area, we must deal with 4.2 billion cubic feet of water or 33 billion gallons. Some of this absorbs into the ground, but much of it runs goes to pipes heading to the rivers. Ideally we retain some of it above ground for an hour or more because the pipes can’t handle this flow. Even with retention, our rivers rise some 10 feet typically and begin to flow at many miles per hour after a storm. They can be seen carrying trees along, and massively eroding the soil, even in areas that were prepared appropriately.
A home based approach to sewage. Many homes near me have this setup — with internal plumbing and a septic field for sewage treatment. Often, these homes are near a stream that flows at least temporarily.
Sanitary sewage flows are far less voluminous. Our county has roughly 1 million people who flush about 100 million gallons per day, generally sending this to our sanitary sewage treatment plants. That averages a mere 4 million gallons per hour, or 500,000 cubic feet. That’s roughly 8000 times less flow than the storm flow. If any significant fraction of the rainwater goes into our sanitary system, it will quickly overwhelm it and back up into our basements.
Many people try to get out of paying the high price for municipal sewage treatment by making their own small system with a septic tank an a septic field. I think this is a great idea, a benefit for them and the county. I will be happy to direct them to appropriate educational materials so that home waste flows to the septic tank where anaerobic bacteria break things down, it should then flow to a septic field that filters the nutrients and allows aerobic bacteria to break things down further. Nutrients in the sewage helps whatever you plant and, as we say, “the grass is always greenest over the septic tank.” As for the county on the whole, I wish we got real value from the fertilizer, as Milwaukee does, and wish we’d separate the sewers.
