http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140306-space-elevator-partial-orbit-science/
This type of space elevator seems more feasible than one that reaches from the surface of the Earth. The information about why this is a better idea provides excellent vocabulary for comparisons and contrast. So in addition to discussing the topic, students can be focused on the useful vocabulary. For example:
- about a quarter of the distance
- would be less than half as long
- worth exploring more
- Today's materials aren't strong enough
- Instead, a much smaller elevator looks less far-fetched.
- a much higher counterweight
- far more efficient than
- using longer tethers resulted in more energy savings
- costs ... are lower than those of ...
- even more energy efficient
- would be better, as it does away with ...
- space elevator
- hanging in space
- space travel
- high orbit
- distance to the moon
- space engineer
- space rockets
- geosynchronous orbit
- communications and television satellites
- low Earth orbit
- the planet's surface
- satellites
- sending a spacecraft from low Earth orbit
- a rocket
- the spacecraft
- rocket-powered transportation
- low-Earth orbit launch
- International Space Elevator Consortium
- energy requirements
- far more efficient than
- more energy savings
- solar powered
- even more energy efficient
- cut the costs of space travel to high orbit by 40 percent
- about a quarter of the distance to the moon
- would be less than half as long
- It now costs about $25,00 per kilogram (2.2 pounds) to put something into geosynchronous orbit
- which extends from roughly 99 miles (160 kilometers) to 1,243 miles (2,000 kilometers) above the planet's surface
- some 26,200 miles (42,164 kilometers) above Earth
- at around $5,000 to $10,000 per kilogram (2.2 pounds), accounting for some of the savings