If that were really necessary, the ribbon could be designed 30% larger (for 26 tons rather than 20) and we would likely be much better off than with sky station.
That is a good alternative solution. Just ensure that the climbers can handle the changeover.
But then, also, I don't think any of the following can be rejected out of hand:
* Lightening might not strike an SE which lacks a tip to accumulate charge.
* The SE might keep lightening from happening in the first place by permanently short circuiting the surrounding air column.
* The SE might be insulating and not attract lightening.
* Location and avoidance movements might reduce lightening to less than once in a thousand years.
* The SE might be able to sustain lightening strikes without damage, as if it was a lightening conductor itself.
* The SE may not have a tip but it could have two sharp edges. Even if it is a tube, it is only a narrow tube.
* Since metal towers get hit we would be very lucky if permanent short circuiting worked but we could be lucky. Graphite is a good conductor so some types of CNT may be.
* Even insulating things like wood and stone get hit by lightning, particularly when wet. Note: The mining industry needs a strong insulting material, power cables that wear out after 6 weeks must cost them a fortune.
* For movement to work the storms would have to be tiny.
* A ribbon that can take lightning strikes would certainly be a good selling point. Air ribbon and space ribbon do not have to have to use the same epoxy or coating.
The point being, at this early stage, we do not know enough about the danger of lightening to make such a drastic change of plans as a sky station.
It is fairly easy to find out more about the weather at at SE landing site. Tether a balloon to a buoy and see what the elements do to it. The longer we leave any changes the more expensive they get. Until SE2 is operational replacing SE1 requires a second rocket launch - very expensive.
Forum 
Show Posts
