Thread: [Traveller_TNE] Low Tech Stuff

Thanks for all y'all's help with the black powder rockets. I'm working on a low tech (TL 3-5) world with no access to fossil fuels -- think a world terraformed in the last few tens of thousands of years. I've been trying to work out the infrastructure for such a world, and power production is a biggie. Wind and water power are good for the cities, but portable power sources are a problem.

At first, I was stuck with two fuel sources from FF&S: alcohol and wood. I managed to work out the stats for "wood gas" when I stumbled across doing research on steel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_gas

Mass and price would be the same as for hydrocarbon distillates, but the power output would be divided by eight. Not a particularly attractive technology, and it doesn't solve the deforestation problem, which on our world was fixed by the increasing use of coal. Alcohol, of course, eats into the food supply so it's not going to be super popular, either, although it would be used to a greater or lesser extent.

Peat is available, but I cannot find stats on its energy density.

On the plus side, as near as I can tell, steel should be available as it has a low carbon content, and that could be supplied by charcoal.

If any of y'all have any ideas for fuels, limitations on technology because of the lack of fossil fuels, or clever workarounds for some of those limitations, I would appreciate hearing your ideas.

Gerry Harris

http://www.aethertraveller.com

"Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war"
— Antony, "Julius Caesar," Act 3, Scene 1

Wind and water? TL 3-5 covers alot of ground.

On the low end of that range, windmills and waterwheels could provide work on a
local level. Not much on a grand scale, but it would be useful for the milling
of grain and other simple, yet tedious, tasks. Of course, if something like the
Roman aqueduct system could be constructed, then that builds up some potential
for putting water to work.

On the high end, they could provide power through wind farms and hydroelectric
dams.

\_/
DED

----- Original Message -----
From: Gerry Harris
To: Traveller [TNE]; GDW House Rules
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:58 AM
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Low Tech Stuff

Thanks for all y'all's help with the black powder rockets. I'm working on a low
tech (TL 3-5) world with no access to fossil fuels -- think a world terraformed
in the last few tens of thousands of years. I've been trying to work out the
infrastructure for such a world, and power production is a biggie. Wind and
water power are good for the cities, but portable power sources are a problem.

At first, I was stuck with two fuel sources from FF&S: alcohol and wood. I
managed to work out the stats for "wood gas" when I stumbled across doing
research on steel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_gas

Mass and price would be the same as for hydrocarbon distillates, but the power
output would be divided by eight. Not a particularly attractive technology, and
it doesn't solve the deforestation problem, which on our world was fixed by the
increasing use of coal. Alcohol, of course, eats into the food supply so it's
not going to be super popular, either, although it would be used to a greater or
lesser extent.

Peat is available, but I cannot find stats on its energy density.

On the plus side, as near as I can tell, steel should be available as it has a
low carbon content, and that could be supplied by charcoal.

If any of y'all have any ideas for fuels, limitations on technology because of
the lack of fossil fuels, or clever workarounds for some of those limitations, I
would appreciate hearing your ideas.

Gerry Harris

http://www.aethertraveller.com

"Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war"
— Antony, "Julius Caesar," Act 3, Scene 1

I picked TL 3-5 because it covers the 19th and early 20th centuries. I wanted hydroelectric power for some of the more advanced states which is TL 5. Most of the world would be solidly TL 4, while the backward areas are going to be TL 3. Unfortunately, transportation is pretty much at the animal power stage because of the lack of fossil fuels. There will be alcohol-powered vehicles, but the society has to make a trade-off between growing crops for human and animal consumption or growing crops for alcohol distillation.

Using wood leads to extensive deforestation.

Lacking fossil fuels puts a definite stopper on some technologies (color-fast dyes and plastics, for instance). It also leads to a number of political tradeoffs, such as the alcohol problem above.

I'm looking for clever workarounds for these limitations. Animal-drawn railways, for instance, or pedal-powered vehicles (I've included a pedal cart on my website as an example). I'm also looking for limitations that I haven't thought of.

Gerry Harris

http://www.aethertraveller.com

"Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war"
— Antony, "Julius Caesar," Act 3, Scene 1

----- Original Message ----
From: DED <>
To:
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 10:25:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Low Tech Stuff

Wind and water? TL 3-5 covers alot of ground.

On the low end of that range, windmills and waterwheels could provide work on a
local level. Not much on a grand scale, but it would be useful for the milling
of grain and other simple, yet tedious, tasks. Of course, if something like the
Roman aqueduct system could be constructed, then that builds up some potential
for putting water to work.

On the high end, they could provide power through wind farms and hydroelectric
dams.

\_/
DED

----- Original Message -----
From: Gerry Harris
To: Traveller [TNE]; GDW House Rules
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:58 AM
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Low Tech Stuff

Thanks for all y'all's help with the black powder rockets. I'm working on a low
tech (TL 3-5) world with no access to fossil fuels -- think a world terraformed
in the last few tens of thousands of years. I've been trying to work out the
infrastructure for such a world, and power production is a biggie. Wind and
water power are good for the cities, but portable power sources are a problem.

At first, I was stuck with two fuel sources from FF&S: alcohol and wood. I
managed to work out the stats for "wood gas" when I stumbled across doing
research on steel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_gas

Mass and price would be the same as for hydrocarbon distillates, but the power
output would be divided by eight. Not a particularly attractive technology, and
it doesn't solve the deforestation problem, which on our world was fixed by the
increasing use of coal. Alcohol, of course, eats into the food supply so it's
not going to be super popular, either, although it would be used to a greater or
lesser extent.

Peat is available, but I cannot find stats on its energy density.

On the plus side, as near as I can tell, steel should be available as it has a
low carbon content, and that could be supplied by charcoal.

If any of y'all have any ideas for fuels, limitations on technology because of
the lack of fossil fuels, or clever workarounds for some of those limitations, I
would appreciate hearing your ideas.

Gerry Harris

http://www.aethertraveller.com

"Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war"
— Antony, "Julius Caesar," Act 3, Scene 1

True, and this world has steam engines as well as internal combustion engines. However, since coal and oil are not available, the steam engines have to run on less efficient fuels and the difficulty of getting those fuels will limit the number of vehicles available for transportation.

Gerry Harris

http://www.aethertraveller.com

"Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war"
— Antony, "Julius Caesar," Act 3, Scene 1

----- Original Message ----
From: "" <>
To:
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 10:27:40 AM
Subject: RE: [Traveller_TNE] Low Tech Stuff

Interesting to note that Egypt (in Alexandria) actually invented a steam
engine about 1400 years before the Western World did. They never developed
it because slave labour was so much cheaper...

-Joel

-----Original Message-----
From: DED
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 1:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Low Tech Stuff

Wind and water? TL 3-5 covers alot of ground.

On the low end of that range, windmills and waterwheels could provide work
on a
local level. Not much on a grand scale, but it would be useful for the
milling
of grain and other simple, yet tedious, tasks. Of course, if something like
the
Roman aqueduct system could be constructed, then that builds up some
potential
for putting water to work.

On the high end, they could provide power through wind farms and
hydroelectric
dams.

\_/
DED

----- Original Message -----
From: Gerry Harris
To: Traveller [TNE]; GDW House Rules
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 9:58 AM
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Low Tech Stuff

Thanks for all y'all's help with the black powder rockets. I'm working on a
low
tech (TL 3-5) world with no access to fossil fuels -- think a world
terraformed
in the last few tens of thousands of years. I've been trying to work out
the
infrastructure for such a world, and power production is a biggie. Wind and
water power are good for the cities, but portable power sources are a
problem.

At first, I was stuck with two fuel sources from FF&S: alcohol and wood. I
managed to work out the stats for "wood gas" when I stumbled across doing
research on steel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_gas

Mass and price would be the same as for hydrocarbon distillates, but the
power
output would be divided by eight. Not a particularly attractive technology,
and
it doesn't solve the deforestation problem, which on our world was fixed by
the
increasing use of coal. Alcohol, of course, eats into the food supply so
it's
not going to be super popular, either, although it would be used to a
greater or
lesser extent.

Peat is available, but I cannot find stats on its energy density.

On the plus side, as near as I can tell, steel should be available as it has
a
low carbon content, and that could be supplied by charcoal.

If any of y'all have any ideas for fuels, limitations on technology because
of
the lack of fossil fuels, or clever workarounds for some of those
limitations, I
would appreciate hearing your ideas.

Gerry Harris

http://www.aethertraveller.com

"Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war"
— Antony, "Julius Caesar," Act 3, Scene 1

On 19 May 2007 at 6:58, Gerry Harris wrote:

> At first, I was stuck with two fuel sources from FF&S: alcohol and
> wood. I managed to work out the stats for "wood gas" when I
> stumbled across doing research on steel:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_gas

> Mass and price would be the same as for hydrocarbon distillates, but
> the power output would be divided by eight. Not a particularly
> attractive technology, and it doesn't solve the deforestation
> problem, which on our world was fixed by the increasing use of coal.
> Alcohol, of course, eats into the food supply so it's not going to
> be super popular, either, although it would be used to a greater or
> lesser extent.

Actually, the best best is controlled pyrolysis of the wood, giving
you charcoal (better for metallurgy) and a lot of distillates. The
distillates include methanol which can be burned, and a number of
useful chemicals.

One trick is that you can make alcohol from the *inedible* parts of
the food plants.

Alas, if the planet has been terraformed, ypu can really afford to do
either. Not until you've got a few centuries worth of excess biomass
sitting around. To say nothing of the fact that you won't have that
much excess *oxygen* until you have a lot of carbon locked up in
biomass and the like.

> Peat is available, but I cannot find stats on its energy density.

Peat isn't going to be available in useful amounts either. It takes
*centuries* to build up a decent peat bog.

> On the plus side, as near as I can tell, steel should be available as it has a low carbon content, and that could be supplied by charcoal.

Except it takes a lot of carbon in the form of charcoal or coke to
produce the iron from the iron ore..

BTW, if the world has only been terraformed for a few hundred years,
erosion is gonna be interesting. For example, the rocks are going to
be oxidizing for millenia. Earth has a thick layer of deposits of
what amount to *rust* from when the atmosphere switched from reducing
to oxidizing.

The rivers and streams will be carrying a lot of iron oxide. In fact,
a lot of normal mineral deposits are due to this and to biological
activity (various sorts of bacteria working on metal ions to produce
the sulfide ores)

If the planet had *no* life then its geology is going to be a major
pain when it comes to mining.

If it just had primitive life in the seas (say only single cells, and
on photosynthesis) you'll have some ores, but not others. And burning
things for power will not be *allowable* as you won't have enough of
the carbon from the original CO2 "sequestered".

And so on.

> If any of y'all have any ideas for fuels, limitations on technology
> because of the lack of fossil fuels, or clever workarounds for some
> of those limitations, I would appreciate hearing your ideas.

Besides hydroelectric, you'll have a lot of solar. Most using "mirror
farms" to focus sunlight on a boiler.

Remember that on earth, sunlight is good for roughly 750 watts per
square meter. Of course, they'll be lucky to harvest even 50% of
that, but still...

A square kilometer of mirrors might be able to produce as much as 50
megawatts. Let's assume really low efficiency (partly due to the need
to leave space between the mirrors and the need for power to steer
them so they track the sun. So call it only 10 megawatts. And that
during only part of the day. (lower power early and late in the day,
plus clouds and the like).

They'd need to store it as well because of the variation. The dialy
output might only average 1 MW.

Aluminum might actually be easier to extract than iron, since the
energy mostly comes from electricity. While carbon *is* used up, it's
probably easier to replace since it's a lower amount.

This will have implications for the world and tech in general.
--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com

On 19 May 2007 at 8:53, Gerry Harris wrote:

> I picked TL 3-5 because it covers the 19th and early 20th centuries.
> I wanted hydroelectric power for some of the more advanced states
> which is TL 5. Most of the world would be solidly TL 4, while the
> backward areas are going to be TL 3. Unfortunately, transportation
> is pretty much at the animal power stage because of the lack of
> fossil fuels. There will be alcohol-powered vehicles, but the
> society has to make a trade-off between growing crops for human and
> animal consumption or growing crops for alcohol distillation.

Worse, you need a lot of biomass *as* biomass to have enough oxygen
in the air to breathe. And to prevent a runaway greenhouse effect. I
suspect you'll need to at least have had the planet get as far as
algae in the ocean to have it have been suitable for terraforming.
:-(

> Using wood leads to extensive deforestation.

Also leads to excess CO2 and a nasty greenhouse effect since you
don't have the coal and oil deposits as a carbon sink.

> Lacking fossil fuels puts a definite stopper on some technologies
> (color-fast dyes and plastics, for instance). It also leads to a
> number of political tradeoffs, such as the alcohol problem above.

Not political. *Ecological*. Which translates to *survival*.

> I'm looking for clever workarounds for these limitations.
> Animal-drawn railways, for instance, or pedal-powered vehicles (I've
> included a pedal cart on my website as an example). I'm also
> looking for limitations that I haven't thought of.

Animal power is *less* efficient. Which counts. Other than the
CO2/Oxygen tradeoff you come out behind using animal power (which
includes human power).

The only "good" side is that you get more fertilizer in the form of
waste p[roducts.

You might want to track down a copy of Hal Clement's "Needle" as it
has a project as part of the background that applies here. Using
"tailored" bacteria to turn "trash" vegetation into oil.

In any case, the thing to keep in mind is that unless there were
native plants (even algae) then every bit of oxygen in the air used
to be part of a CO2 molecule. Which means that all the carbon from
that CO2 had to be buried as fossil fuel deposits or else converted
into biomass. That's a *lot* of biomass. Enough to make your fuel
concerns minor.

--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com

You would think that the lack of fossil fuels would seriously hinder industrial development. Or
maybe humanity is just very lazy, in a reach for the low hanging fruit sort of way. It may be
argued by future historians that the exploitation of fossil fuels actually retarded the
development of human technology in some very perverse ways. Consider these alternatives, some of
whom actually predate the infernal combustion engine:

1. Tidal power might be utilisable at this low of a tech level.

http://inventors.about.com/od/tstartinventions/a/tidal_power.htm

A system of Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) power might also be available:

http://www.nrel.gov/otec/what.html

2. Alcohol can be derived from more than food sources. Cellulosic ethanol is the next wave of
biofuels here in the USA, being derived from sources such as rice straw (leftover from rice
harvesting) or switchgrass. And BP and Dupont are apparently looking beyond ethanol (which has
only 70% of the thermal output as octane) towards butanol (4 carbon alcohol as opposed to the two
carbon ethanol) which has higher thermal output and is easier to work with existing internal
combustion engines.

3. Another source of fuel are early fuel cells:

http://www.fuelcellstore.com/information/fuel_cell_history.html

In this case eletrolysis of H2O will be highly inefficient, but you have plenty of animal dung,
which can be used for a process called Anaerobic Digester:

http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=28814

4. Algae! Its not just that green guck in your swimming pool anymore:

http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/pdf/algae_salton_sea.pdf

5. The Common Cold and an Uncommon Battery

http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2153668/viruses-assemble-ultra-small

6. How about solar power without the use of those unattainable photovoltaic cells? You just need
some high temperature mirrors and a lot of salt:

http://www.solarpaces.org/solar_tower.pdf

7. How about a nice, hot bath Iceland-style:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_power_in_Iceland

8. Don't have fossil fuels for aviation or rocketry? That didn't stop the Germans...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-Stoff

9. Another wacky German invention with great potential:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/12/991215072333.htm
http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/peroxide.html

--- Gerry Harris <> wrote:

> Thanks for all y'all's help with the black powder rockets. I'm working on a low tech (TL 3-5)
> world with no access to fossil fuels -- think a world terraformed in the last few tens of
> thousands of years. I've been trying to work out the infrastructure for such a world, and power
> production is a biggie. Wind and water power are good for the cities, but portable power
> sources are a problem.
>
> At first, I was stuck with two fuel sources from FF&S: alcohol and wood. I managed to work out
> the stats for "wood gas" when I stumbled across doing research on steel:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_gas
>
> Mass and price would be the same as for hydrocarbon distillates, but the power output would be
> divided by eight. Not a particularly attractive technology, and it doesn't solve the
> deforestation problem, which on our world was fixed by the increasing use of coal. Alcohol, of
> course, eats into the food supply so it's not going to be super popular, either, although it
> would be used to a greater or lesser extent.
>
> Peat is available, but I cannot find stats on its energy density.
>
> On the plus side, as near as I can tell, steel should be available as it has a low carbon
> content, and that could be supplied by charcoal.
>
> If any of y'all have any ideas for fuels, limitations on technology because of the lack of
> fossil fuels, or clever workarounds for some of those limitations, I would appreciate hearing
> your ideas.
>
>
> Gerry Harris
>
> http://www.aethertraveller.com
>
> "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war"
> — Antony, "Julius Caesar," Act 3, Scene 1
>
>
>

There is a world that was borderline habitable, that features prominently in
Honor Harrington's line of books - Grayson. When the spaceships first
arrived, they found a very inhospitible world. The soil was heavy in metals
and a good number of their population died. They had to resort to orbital
farms to keep the food growing.

While the world is TL3/4, one wonders why a government doesn't buy/lease a
fusion plant from a nearby megacorp? Cheap, endless power would do wonders
for a low tech planet. Lease the plant, include a 3-year onsite tech crew,
and carve a new world.

Earth couldn't do it because we're truly alone. However, the United States,
United Nations, etc are always going to some Third World country with
high-tech and durable gear that will filter water, etc. I can imagine a
MegaCorp in Traveller that specialises in 'helping' the lower tech Brothers
climb up the tech ladder.

Sure, the Scouts control access to off-world tech, but applications can be
made. I mean, if a world's standard of living is so low, if life is
threatened, surely a few fusion plants wouldn't harm anyone. Also - if the
world was terraformed, how was it tarraformed? Seeding the atmosphere with
microbes? That could take hundreds of thousands of years if it even worked.
The odds are, high-tech gear went in to assist in changing the biosphere of
the planet. What powered those eco-changing machines? Odds are it wasn't
local sunlight. They would have brought in fusion plants. Big heavy fusion
plants. It would probably be more cost effective to leave them behind for
the colonists than to disassemble them and lift them off-world. Sell 'em.

If there is nothing that the colonists could trade with megacorps to buy a
fusion plant, then why were trillions spent terraforming this planet?
Especially with 11,000 solar systems to pick a plant from. There must be a
military or economic reason to alter the make-up of an entire planet to
support life.

Sorry to be a negative nanny, but that's one of the things about Traveller
that bugs me: "Low Tech". Someone, somewhere, has a piece of TL10,12,or 15
equipment that can be transported to a low-tech world for a one-time
expense, that would radically alter that world. If someone landed in a Far
Trader in New York and offered to sell us a working TL12 Fusion Plant for
billions of dollars, with manual and tech support and spare parts, we'd get
the money. Somehow. Then the R&D would kick in and we'd have home grown
fusion plants and we'd see where we went wrong.

For the most part, India is fairly low tech. Yet there are guys on the
street that are selling (and repairing) satellite phones. He rides his bike
through the mud 'streets', manuevering his way past farm animals walking on
the street, goes to his hut, takes his basket out of the back of his bike,
and peddles satellite phones to tourists. The man is not stupid nor
ignorant - he can also fix the phones. He just lives in a town where
obvious, visible tech is very low. They don't have a series of runners to
communicate between villages - they use radio or satellite phones. A
perfect example of high tech making life in a low tech environment easier.

-Joel

-----Original Message-----
From: Gerry Harris
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 11:59 PM
To: Traveller [TNE]; GDW House Rules
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Low Tech Stuff

Thanks for all y'all's help with the black powder rockets. I'm working on a
low tech (TL 3-5) world with no access to fossil fuels -- think a world
terraformed in the last few tens of thousands of years. I've been trying to
work out the infrastructure for such a world, and power production is a
biggie. Wind and water power are good for the cities, but portable power
sources are a problem.

At first, I was stuck with two fuel sources from FF&S: alcohol and wood. I
managed to work out the stats for "wood gas" when I stumbled across doing
research on steel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_gas

Mass and price would be the same as for hydrocarbon distillates, but the
power output would be divided by eight. Not a particularly attractive
technology, and it doesn't solve the deforestation problem, which on our
world was fixed by the increasing use of coal. Alcohol, of course, eats
into the food supply so it's not going to be super popular, either, although
it would be used to a greater or lesser extent.

Peat is available, but I cannot find stats on its energy density.

On the plus side, as near as I can tell, steel should be available as it has
a low carbon content, and that could be supplied by charcoal.

If any of y'all have any ideas for fuels, limitations on technology because
of the lack of fossil fuels, or clever workarounds for some of those
limitations, I would appreciate hearing your ideas.

Gerry Harris

http://www.aethertraveller.com

"Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war"
— Antony, "Julius Caesar," Act 3, Scene 1

On 19 May 2007 at 16:47, Gerry Harris wrote:

> Actually, the world has been terraformed for several tens of
> thousands of years (think, the Ancients, but not quite as old), and
> peat bogs in Europe are only about 9,000 years old. I did a little
> research on peat and it's a very slow-burning, low heat kind of
> fuel. It might be good for heating homes, but until more
> modernrefining techniques, it's not that good for industrial uses.

Ah, I got the wrong impression.

> One person did turn me onto using methane from animal waste, which
> turns out to be nearly as good as gasoline, energy-density-wise.

A *much* better source is available if they know what we know know
(even if they are a lower TL).

Methane clathrate can be found in *huge* amounts on the continental
shelves.

Basicly, under moderate pressure and *above* freezing (but still
cold) water and methane interact to form a sort of "ice" that has
methane trapped in molecular cages between the water molecules.

When samples are dragged back to the surface they fizz like crazy as
the methane escapes.

>From your description, there's been *more* than enough time to form
deposits. The methane comes from the decomposition of organic
material in the seabed.

--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com

>Earth couldn't do it because we're truly alone. However, the
>United States, United Nations, etc are always going to some
> Third World country with high-tech and durable gear that
> will filter water, etc. I can imagine a MegaCorp in
> Traveller that specialises in 'helping' the lower
> tech Brothers climb up the tech ladder.

I disagree. Sure, a nearby Megacorp *could* choose to help a lower tech
world by giving them a TL12 fusion plant, but they won't - for exactly
the same reason that the US, UN and EU haven't started building
desalination plants in Mozabique and Kenya. Those countries can't afford
it, and no rich country is prepared to make charity on that level.

I'm not sure what you mean that the US and UN are always going to some
Third World country with high-tech, unless you mean the stuff that
armies or corps take with them for their own use. There are a couple of
charity organisations who have developed Appropriate Technology items
for third world countries, but they're all on the level of stoves, well
pumps and stuff like that. The economics just don't support passing high
tech to low tech countries; development is a long process that requires
infrastructure buildup. (Also, as outlined in the TNE World Tamer's
Handbook, even with investment, it takes time and people - both valuable
resources.)

That leads me on to India. Yes, India may well have guys repairing
satphones in the street, next to ox-drawn carts, but India is not a
low-tech country. It's a very high tech country with, importantly, a
huge economy. They have a space programme, nuclear weapons, submarines
and an enormous IT sector. The fact that they also have an impoverished
sector of the population who can't afford access to this tech doesn't
change that. They're a high tech nation - just not a monolithic one.
Largely, I suspect, this is because of the pace of their development -
their infrastructure development has lagged behind their technological
and economic achievements.

I used to think the Trav model made no sense - that you could have low
tech worlds next to high tech ones - but I've come to change my mind.
Low tech worlds will stay low tech because they can't afford high tech.
Or because they once were high tech but their economy has collapsed. Of
course, one has to bear in mind the difference between Trav and
historical development - a low tech society in Trav knows that fusion
power is possible, and may know the theory. It's not about what you've
figured out how to do, it's about what you can afford the infrastructure
to support doing.

I think when it boils down to it, a GM will always be able to invent a
reason why it's in a high-tech world's interest to bootstrap a nearby
low-tech world, but equally it shouldn't take much effort to come up
with an explanation as to why they don't. And so long as that's true,
the model can make sense.

Nick

-----Original Message-----
>Earth couldn't do it because we're truly alone. However, the
>United States, United Nations, etc are always going to some
> Third World country with high-tech and durable gear that
> will filter water, etc. I can imagine a MegaCorp in
> Traveller that specialises in 'helping' the lower
> tech Brothers climb up the tech ladder.

I disagree. Sure, a nearby Megacorp *could* choose to help a lower tech
world by giving them a TL12 fusion plant, but they won't - for exactly
the same reason that the US, UN and EU haven't started building
desalination plants in Mozabique and Kenya. Those countries can't afford
it, and no rich country is prepared to make charity on that level.

I'm not sure what you mean that the US and UN are always going to some
Third World country with high-tech, unless you mean the stuff that
armies or corps take with them for their own use. There are a couple of
charity organisations who have developed Appropriate Technology items
for third world countries, but they're all on the level of stoves, well
pumps and stuff like that. The economics just don't support passing high
tech to low tech countries; development is a long process that requires
infrastructure buildup. (Also, as outlined in the TNE World Tamer's
Handbook, even with investment, it takes time and people - both valuable
resources.)

That leads me on to India. Yes, India may well have guys repairing
satphones in the street, next to ox-drawn carts, but India is not a
low-tech country. It's a very high tech country with, importantly, a
huge economy. They have a space programme, nuclear weapons, submarines
and an enormous IT sector. The fact that they also have an impoverished
sector of the population who can't afford access to this tech doesn't
change that. They're a high tech nation - just not a monolithic one.
Largely, I suspect, this is because of the pace of their development -
their infrastructure development has lagged behind their technological
and economic achievements.

I used to think the Trav model made no sense - that you could have low
tech worlds next to high tech ones - but I've come to change my mind.
Low tech worlds will stay low tech because they can't afford high tech.
Or because they once were high tech but their economy has collapsed. Of
course, one has to bear in mind the difference between Trav and
historical development - a low tech society in Trav knows that fusion
power is possible, and may know the theory. It's not about what you've
figured out how to do, it's about what you can afford the infrastructure
to support doing.

I think when it boils down to it, a GM will always be able to invent a
reason why it's in a high-tech world's interest to bootstrap a nearby
low-tech world, but equally it shouldn't take much effort to come up
with an explanation as to why they don't. And so long as that's true,
the model can make sense.

Nick

===================================
[joel]

Good points, Nick.

Here's my take on it.

How did these worlds come to be? The 11,000 worlds. Grandfather and the
Ancients transplanted SOME of the humans and uplifted animals around in a
seemingly random manner.

But the other 99% of the worlds - how did they come to be? Colonists?
Corporations? Religious separists?

There is a REASON these people picked a planet. A reason founded in
economic reality. Why got to Planet Gorgon if there is just mud there? Is
the mud good for anything else? Is there Lanthium in it? Why are there
people there?

And why would an organisation of any sort - government, religious, etc -
make a LOWER tech level than the t.l. of the colonist ships? If we went to
Mars, would we take wooden carts and telegraph poles? No. We'd bring as
much high tech stuff (for us) as we could cram onboard the ship. Why bring
a 1950s walkie talkie that weighs 20 kilos when a 2007 model is 1/100 the
mass and 100x more reliable?

So why would people load up a colony expedition and bring along all that
"old fashioned" low tech?

Does any country on this planet still make vacuum tubes? Why would a colony
on another world bui;d a vacuum tube factory?

So, I don't understand how TL1 and TL2 and TL3 worlds exist. Period.
Unless they are Red Zones and they have forgotten they are part of the
Imperium.

Now, if a planet was settled, then they have an economy. They have a system
of buying and selling. Something. They trade something. There is an
economic and business reason for the colony being founded. Rare Minerals
(that aren't in thousands of asteroids in 10,000+ solar systems), something.

So, if they have people, and an economy, and something that makes the people
worth being there in the first place, then they can buy a TL12 fusion plant.

Does my logic make sense?

When I was talking about U.S./UN taking high tech gear to third world
nations, I was speaking of (for instance) high-tech water filtration pumps
designed by NASA and used to help recover clean water from filthy rivers.

-Joel

> There is a REASON these people picked a planet. A reason
> founded in economic reality. Why got to Planet Gorgon if there
> is just mud there? Is the mud good for anything else? Is there
> Lanthium in it? Why are there people there?

First up, we've got several thousand years of history going on here. For
a colony to be built only requires that at some stage in there, some
group of people had the means and motive to go there.

There are plenty of motives for colonisation. A religious or political
group at odds with a government and wanting to strike out on their own.
A commercial venture in the classic sci-fi sense, selling tickets and
land rights to colonists. A government wanting to extend its strategic
reach and funding a colony. I could make these up all day.

The Conquistadors, the Pilgrim Fathers, the Midwest land rush, the
Klondike, transportation to Australia, Roanoke, Sealand, Darwin,
Australian deportation to Nauru - a huge variety of (sometimes
nonsensical) reasons why groups of poeple wound up in a new place. Give
enough people enough time, and they'll want to expand - even into
seemingly bonkers situations.

> If we went to Mars, would we take wooden carts and telegraph poles?
> No. We'd bring as much high tech stuff (for us) as we could
> cram onboard the ship. Why bring a 1950s walkie talkie that
> weighs 20 kilos when a 2007 model is 1/100 the mass and 100x
> more reliable?

Because a Mars colony wouldn't be an independent settlement - it would
be totally reliant on Earth's infrastructure. Let's say it survives a
hundred years or so, making it closer to a typical low-tech Trav world.

Let's say its UWP is C-451-433-6 (from a fairly average set of rolls on
the TNE world gen tables, with a Mars-like world). So we've got a
self-sustaining population of 50,000 people at TL-6.

Assume they get cut off from Earth. They've got the indigenous knowledge
and infrastructure to maintain their nuclear power plant, probably build
a new (simpler) one if they needed to. They've got all their TL-8
doo-hickeys like computers and modern walkie-talkies, but they can only
maintain them by salvaging parts from other electronic devices - no
infrastructure to fab microchips with only 50,000 people. But they can
resolder components between things. Stuff that's built on that sort of
principle will survive, stuff that's not will eventually break down
beyond repair. Their tech is sliding back from TL-8 to TL-6. They don;t
want it to, but that's what they can support with their indigenous
infrastructure.

Now, say they get contact re-established with Earth, but being used to
muddling along on their own, they declare independence. NASA isn't
sending them computers any more; if they want high-tech stuff they've
got to buy it with foreign currency, and pay to have it shipped out.
Which means they have to export something. Having nothing very
interesting to export, they're suddenly a very poor, fiercely
independent, low tech world with very little prospect for clawing
themselves up the tech tree.

> So, if they have people, and an economy, and something that makes
> the people worth being there in the first place, then they can buy
> a TL12 fusion plant.

By that logic, Sierra Leone would have a civil nuclear reactor. They
have people, and an economy, and something that makes it worth being
there in the first place (diamond mines) - but they can't afford a
nuclear programme, despite the enormous benefits that cheap electricity
would bring to their people and their economy. Economics tend to keep
poor people poor.

> When I was talking about U.S./UN taking high tech gear to third
> world nations, I was speaking of (for instance) high-tech
> water filtration pumps designed by NASA and used to help
> recover clean water from filthy rivers.

Okay. I don't think that happens.

Nick

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2006/jun/HQ_06239_Iraq_Water.html

[quote]
NASA Technology Aids Water Purification Effort in Iraq

NASA engineers, who are used to making a difference in the lives of
astronauts in space, recently had the chance to improve the lives of
villagers in Iraq by using NASA technology. Volunteering their own time,
engineers at the agency's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala.,
helped install and test a water purification system in the northern village
of Kendala.
...
[/quote]

http://www1.jsc.nasa.gov/er/seh/pg72s95.html

[quote]
Gerald V. Columbo of Umpqua Research Company displays a Shuttle- derived
Umpqua filter. The basic filter is filler with iodine resin, dispensed in a
water supply for killing bacteria. The filter employs other purifying
materials; the colored banding identifies the different materials used to
remove different contaminants.

A Space Shuttle derived system for purifying water highlights a selection of
spinoff for sonsumer, home and recreational use.

...

Vector is also engaged in a joint venture with a Saudi Arabian firm for
marketing DIAMOND RAIN systems in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar
and the United Arab Emirates. Additionally, Vector is introducing the water
purification technology in the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Mexico, Egypt and
Angola. Ongoing discussions with a number of countries suggest that DIAMOND
RAIN systems will find extremely broad applications in Asia, Africa and
Latin America.
...
[/quote]

---

I can see 1% of inhabited planets fitting the "Other" criteria, but most?
all?
Regina was founded by religious extremists?

---
Yup - that's right. Thousands of years of history. And there are still
planets at TL3.
Yup. Perfectly logical.

Or are all of these low-tech worlds 'backslid' technologically? All of
them? Most of them?
And all of these worlds have low-pop and NO independent manufacturing
capabilities?
I think we'd have to assume Mars would be an independent world, if we're
taking it as an example of a typical world in the Imperium. When the
colonists get to Mars, how are they going to mine and explore and build
structures? I'm sure they'll have machines, and I'm sure the machines will
have spare parts and the capability to produce new spares.

---

So we build a nuclear power plant on another planet, and have no spares and
no way of producing spares? With an average transit time of 18 months -
there's no backup? No R&D facilities? No labs? Just a bunch of guys
walking around on Mars, waiting for the link to mother earth to dry up.

---

England was in her expansion phase when it established Australia.
Relatively virgin - no Europeans. But land. and gold. and now that we
understand radioactives, Australia has a very wealthy Uranium mining
facility.

---

So why are there TL3 worlds in the Imperium?

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Bradbeer
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 9:14 PM
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Low Tech Stuff

> There is a REASON these people picked a planet. A reason
> founded in economic reality. Why got to Planet Gorgon if there
> is just mud there? Is the mud good for anything else? Is there
> Lanthium in it? Why are there people there?

First up, we've got several thousand years of history going on here. For
a colony to be built only requires that at some stage in there, some
group of people had the means and motive to go there.

There are plenty of motives for colonisation. A religious or political
group at odds with a government and wanting to strike out on their own.
A commercial venture in the classic sci-fi sense, selling tickets and
land rights to colonists. A government wanting to extend its strategic
reach and funding a colony. I could make these up all day.

The Conquistadors, the Pilgrim Fathers, the Midwest land rush, the
Klondike, transportation to Australia, Roanoke, Sealand, Darwin,
Australian deportation to Nauru - a huge variety of (sometimes
nonsensical) reasons why groups of poeple wound up in a new place. Give
enough people enough time, and they'll want to expand - even into
seemingly bonkers situations.

> If we went to Mars, would we take wooden carts and telegraph poles?
> No. We'd bring as much high tech stuff (for us) as we could
> cram onboard the ship. Why bring a 1950s walkie talkie that
> weighs 20 kilos when a 2007 model is 1/100 the mass and 100x
> more reliable?

Because a Mars colony wouldn't be an independent settlement - it would
be totally reliant on Earth's infrastructure. Let's say it survives a
hundred years or so, making it closer to a typical low-tech Trav world.

Let's say its UWP is C-451-433-6 (from a fairly average set of rolls on
the TNE world gen tables, with a Mars-like world). So we've got a
self-sustaining population of 50,000 people at TL-6.

Assume they get cut off from Earth. They've got the indigenous knowledge
and infrastructure to maintain their nuclear power plant, probably build
a new (simpler) one if they needed to. They've got all their TL-8
doo-hickeys like computers and modern walkie-talkies, but they can only
maintain them by salvaging parts from other electronic devices - no
infrastructure to fab microchips with only 50,000 people. But they can
resolder components between things. Stuff that's built on that sort of
principle will survive, stuff that's not will eventually break down
beyond repair. Their tech is sliding back from TL-8 to TL-6. They don;t
want it to, but that's what they can support with their indigenous
infrastructure.

Now, say they get contact re-established with Earth, but being used to
muddling along on their own, they declare independence. NASA isn't
sending them computers any more; if they want high-tech stuff they've
got to buy it with foreign currency, and pay to have it shipped out.
Which means they have to export something. Having nothing very
interesting to export, they're suddenly a very poor, fiercely
independent, low tech world with very little prospect for clawing
themselves up the tech tree.

> So, if they have people, and an economy, and something that makes
> the people worth being there in the first place, then they can buy
> a TL12 fusion plant.

By that logic, Sierra Leone would have a civil nuclear reactor. They
have people, and an economy, and something that makes it worth being
there in the first place (diamond mines) - but they can't afford a
nuclear programme, despite the enormous benefits that cheap electricity
would bring to their people and their economy. Economics tend to keep
poor people poor.

> When I was talking about U.S./UN taking high tech gear to third
> world nations, I was speaking of (for instance) high-tech
> water filtration pumps designed by NASA and used to help
> recover clean water from filthy rivers.

Okay. I don't think that happens.

Nick