I kinda went on a little research spree on economics this afternoon but at one point I figured it’s probably good to know if it’s possible for, say, at least 98% of people on earth to live a happy fulfilled life at all.
I know there’s plenty of people who’d be more than happy to have literally nothing more than a house, food and water, but that still leaves a whole lot of people who want other things in life.
Do we have any metrics or data on wether the earth can sustain roughly 8 billion humans?
We’re sustainably building megastructures too? How is that done exactly?
Fairly certain you’re being intentionally dense, but I’ll respond in good faith here:
I already told you the megastructures I want to build: a Lofstrom Loop, then a skyhook, and then an orbital ring. Wikipedia has good descriptions of each. Each would make getting mass into orbit much easier, so you start with the smallest to simplify the larger ones. The Lofstrom Loop would likely cost $10-$30 billion, and reduce cost/kg to a few hundred dollars. The skyhook and orbital ring would be orders of magnitude reductions. With the orbital ring up, we could literally winch payloads up to 80km, ship it around the Earth on maglev, or launch it off to other parts of the solar system - all powered by solar panels. If that’s not ‘sustainable’ in your eyes, I don’t know that further discussion will be productive.
Finally we agree on something.
What is the energy, emissions and materials costs of megastructure construction and maintenance? Where is this surplus coming from considering we’re already in deep ecological overshoot.
How do you get back within the planetary boundaries limits when people are still trying to grow and expand and accumulate resources.
Sci-fi handwavium is ridiculous. Referencing wikipedia as you suggested says "In works by Alexander Bolonkin it is suggested that Lofstrom’s project has many unsolved problems and that it is very far from a current technology.[7][8][9] "