Re: Time to retire?

[Rick Tarara <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "John S. Denker" <jsd@MONMOUTH.COM>
To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: Time to retire?


> Rick Tarara wrote:
> >  yearly, per-capita.....?
> > total cost over 100 years--only a factor of 45 billion too high!
>
> Is this a test?
>
> I would have thought the fudge factor would be > 620 billion.
>   http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/popclockw
No John, it is not a test.  The project was based on a projected population
of 450 million people (we're being optimistic) and the cost projection is
for the year 2100.  Given the mathematical sophistication of this class
(they had trouble with the Carnot efficiency of a power plant operating
between 300 and 600 Kelvin), we don't worry about details such as accurately
averaging over the 100 years at the changing population figures.  This
project (designing an energy distribution system for the year 2100) did,
however, worry about such things as the lifetime of wind generators, solar
panels, and whole power plants.  Of course, I did help with those
calculations.  ANYWAY, the posted number was $44 trillion for the project
(capital costs only) at about $1000 per capita yearly.  The common quiz
answer was the $44 trillion as the yearly, per-capita cost.

Cheers,

Rick