No. I want to fight gravity at $100/kg. Hence the megastructures.
I’m fairly certain that with the resources of an entire solar system on tap, the word ‘sustainable’ takes on a new meaning. If we use few enough resources that they won’t run out before the Sun explodes, does it matter that it’s not net zero?
When life gives you a lemon, go to the store and buy more.
Awful lot of resources out in those asteroid belts. Put up a Lofstrom Loop, then a skyhook, then an orbital ring. Then you’ve got a whole solar system’s worth of resources.
I agree that the Earth should basically be managed as a wildlife preserve / population center. But you’re missing that we’re not limited to the resources on Earth.
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.