I've recently improved upon a few math formula issues and as always the assortments of improving my syntax, plus I've re-introduced a fairly traditional BTU energy factor formula. Here are the rough drawings of various utility power units for a vertical CO2 Wind-Powered community and/or that of an individual surface dwelling, as being perhaps situated at something like an elevation site of 5 km. Sorry these primitive drawings are only 2D, not even the least bit infomercial 3D and fully animated like so many of NASA's web pages (none of those nifty orchestrated surround sound tracks neither), so that must represent that all of this is bogus stuff, guess again...
VERTICAL CO2 WIND ENERGY isn't anything to sneeze at, at least not if it's situated within a serious TOWER of POWER.
I believe this addition/update is just physics-101 of extracting energy where it's supposedly so hot and nasty all the time, and of apparently where our 811°K electro-mechanicals of motor/generators and of quite a large variety of other thermally tolerant technology can't possibly function because it's so darn hot and nasty.
If there's 4+bar/km, as well as 10°K/km in differentials to works with, as such I can't seem to uncover why an absolute village idiot heathen couldn't have created more energy then they'd know what to do with, unless it because they're too busy at cruising about their terrific season of nighttime within those fantastic flying machines of rigid airships constructed of basalt/silica composites, or even a good deal of iron should do nicely.
As based upon the premise that bigger is nearly always better, if nothing else than for the shock and awe exaggeration factor, whereas if we started this "TOWER of POWER" off with a 400 meter base diameter opening of (125,664 m2), a 1 km vertical offset with a 100 meter (7,864 m2) exit, of somewhat of a tall cooling-tower like venturi having a radial turbine at the top/exit, whereas a mere 1 m/s velocity of entering CO2 might conceivably accelerate under the internal friction and back pressure of having to exit the power turbine at perhaps as little as 4 m/s, whereas I hate to say that's an absolutely horrific amount of energy, but it is. Unobstructed, the exit velocity should exceed 8 m/s considering the nighttime 4+bar/km and thermal differential of -10°K/km.
That's 31,456 m3 worth of potential volume that's clocking through a power radial turbine at 4 m/s.
If that sort of volume were to be utilizing the perfectly good nighttime density of 65 kg/m3, thereby 65 * 31.456e3 = 2.044e6 kg = 2.044e12 grams
KE=.5MV2, thus 1e12 * 16 = 16e12 joules/s, or 16 terawatts.
Of course there are certain to be those conversion losses, such as perhaps 50% if it's a really piss poor application of such technology, though how about a rather pathetic 10% worth of efficiency is still 1.6 terawatts/s. Scale this one any way you'd like, then perhaps you should tell me what's what.
Here's just a typical Earthly wind-power link that's chuck full of interesting stuff. Keeping in mind that this data is for the horizontal aspects of Earth's rather pathetic 1.225 kg/m3 of atmospheric density that offers nearly zilch worth of vertical differential. http://www.windpower.org/en/stat/unitsw.htm#visco
These following examples were those originally based upon the previous (formula #6 as for utilizing a 35% rotor/turbine efficiency). Whereas these following examples will now reflect the outcome as produced from formula No.7
@194 kw: That's the little one on your right; that smallest of power turbine outfitted mini-towers (I'm calling this one a residential standard) in as such that it utilizes a pathetic 0.1 bar differential. In order to accomplish this feat, it's vertical tunnel or venturi column height of design is 25 meters worth. The energy output, as that based upon a conservative conversion formula, from an entrance velocity of 0.5 m/s and subsequent exit velocity of a mere 1 m/s, as based upon the 10 meter rotor (- hub) of 74 m2, produces 194 kw and, that's continuous all night long.
One seriously needs to understand something; that even this smallest of vertical CO2 wind power achievements is entirely a Venus thing, as nothing could be constructed nor applied upon the same principals as here on Earth, not even from a 100 km tall mega version couldn't obtain this degree of essentially free kinetic energy because, Earth's atmosphere is so meager and otherwise absolutely thin as hell, nearly worthless as far as achieving any significant vertical pressure differential, let alone backed by the sort of terrific CO2 density/m3 and thereby much offering greater kinetic energy values as those available on Venus. The only alternative would be to utilize such pressure differentials as could be available from sufficiently deep oceans, although there's a great deal more friction involved, structural complications as well as corrosion with anything saltwater related, but none the less, energy can and is in fact being derived by essentially this very same concept, so it's certainly not an unfounded nor unproven technology.
Just because I can, I've drawn a two level 50 X 50 meter Venus residence, as configured for really big ass and tall nocturnal lizard folk (interior ceiling of 5 meters and, those windows are mostly for the benefit of humanoid visitors or possibly even as pets or livestock, as for nighttime it's obviously pitch black outside except fot the nocturnal UV sensitive vision of slight star light and mostly otherwise illumination fro Earthshine), of which this structure as most likely situated up against a bank or mountain side and affords (- wind tower through structure) a spacious interior of 4500 m2. In addition, there is that rather sizable entry ground level vessel port area, perhaps suited for SUV and AUV pod parking, providing a garage area for a pair of personal airships and, remember folks; that even at this site elevation of 5 km, we're still at a buoyancy of 62+kg/m3 when the outside temp is 650+K and that's back up to 66 kg/m3 at 600K, so any personal AUV airship size is not likely all that much of a compromise, especially if your residence is located up against a steep bank (being another good thing for whatever slight up-draft potentials), where your larger airship (call this one your 100+ tonne long-range AUV motor-home) silo can otherwise be situated so as being fully protected by all of that nearby/underground accessible terrain. Any airship containing 250 m3 would fit nicely below this residential structure, affording a gross buoyancy of at least 15 metric tonnes (more likely 16.5 tonnes at nighttime, that being equal in weight as to lifting 18 Earth metric tonnes), in fact folks, there would be room to spare as for parking four of these 30+ meter long AUV's.
As for thermal insulation considerations; On Venus, one of the most effective and safest known forms of such insulation material or substance (for regarding least possible thermal conduction) is H2 as well as just plain old N2 as really not all that hard to come by. Because such little solar IR ever reaches your daytime abode and, their season of nighttime is certainly a factor of mostly thermal conduction issues and of subsequent convection heat, so much so that as for your residence(s), places of work and even the local metro transportation might simply utilize outer walls offering H2 displaced voids or better yet, occupied by mylar like cells or layers, as filled in between or displaced with 100% H2 or even N2 might do the trick of exceeding R-128 (if such insulation cells could be further accomplished as under a slight vacuum [say as within small/thin glass spheres], then there's not even the slightest chance of any H2 leakage [now at R-256] and, not that H2 represents any safety consideration whatsoever [as it really much doesn't for Earth either, just from a bunch of US propaganda, disinformation and lies that state otherwise], as H2 is simply representing darn good practical utilization of what should likely be a valuable commodity on Venus, as that having to be produced from H2O that had to first be distilled out of those acidic clouds), as well as applying H2 for displacements within those 254 mm thick multi pain pyrex windows (that's multiple H2 filled gaps with perhaps the outer plate coated for being 50% IR reflective) should be getting us close to R-100 if not better, thus local insulation code for windows could easily be become based upon R-128 and R-256 as for other construction (for windows, I'm considering roughly a 1% hourly loss or gain, depending upon which point or direction of thermal transfer you're speaking of and, 0.5% or less as for those outer wall/surface structure considerations).
The insulation of certain rock is considered as roughly R-1 per inch (perhaps as little as 0.5-R/inch for granet), thereby 2.5 to 3 meters worth of quarry rock could easily equate as offering R-64 and, going by the size of those massive rock quarries, I would have to say that someone had already thought of using said rock. On Earth, our best commercial triple pain windows with krypton (Kr) gas and special coatings manage an R-12, another commercial product "Hi R+ Plus 10 - Maxuus" offers only R-10, however, the vastly superior insulation of H2 (even at 75 bar) is darn near an ideal barrier of conduction mode issues (remember that on Earth our thermal concerns are those mostly of IR radiant mode thermal transfers, thus H2 by itself is obviously not such a great solution), say at least R-32 per 25mm of total window construction thickness and R-64 for perhaps dual 75 mm (that's nearly 4" worth of mostly multiple H2 voids and the rest comprised of 3+ layers [5 layers being more ideal] or plates of whatever pyrex, not that overall window thickness is any issue when some of your exterior rock walls are perhaps 2.5+ meters thick to start off with).
The following heat rejection or barrier formula is somewhat of a industry standard, but still not exactly what I was looking for, as you need to first convert your K's into F's in order to come up with your TD factor.
I ran off some examples of thermal losses per 1000 m2 of surface area as based upon an overall R-Factor of 64. The first was for an exterior of 600K = 620F and, the interior at 300K = 80F which gives us the TD @540. Subsequently we'll need to deal with 90,821 btu's or roughly 27 KW per hour.
Second run was for the same 1000 m2 of surface area as also based upon an R-Factor of 64. The an exterior ambient of 550K = 530F and, the interior at 350K = 170F which gives us the TD @360. Subsequently we must deal with 60,547.5 btu's or 18 KW per hour per 1000 m2
As you can realize, even at the greater 27 Kw/hr/1000 m2, that,s well within the capacity of supporting a modest residential unit, as having energy capability for managing 4000 m2 worth of outer surfaces and windows (R-64 rated) with energy to spare for other appliances (remembering that you certainly don't need any artificial energy as for cooking nor sanitation, just cold beer). That's way cool enough for humans, probably way too damn cool for any good nocturnal lizard (under pressure, nearly all life forms can and many do manage at greater temperatures). Should energy conservation become a consideration, then accepting that somewhat greater interior temperature of 350K and/or striving for the R-100 factor could certainly become the next logical evolution, especially if space and weight are not factors and you've got yourself some of that nifty H2 as stored within glass spheres, for displacing whatever CO2/N2 is in between you and that toasty exterior of Venus.
Such obvious solutions as for insulating (especially conduction wise) can't be anything all that unobtainable, as this is not "rocket science" but more like "common sense science" or for all of my pro-NASA damage control freaks, how about "Duh science" and, even more so logical if that's having anything to do with salvaging your sorry ass and keeping your beer cold at the same time. Of course folks, since Venus gravity is merely 81%, along with H2 representing a fairly terrific nighttime buoyancy of perhaps 66 kg/m3 (51 kg/m3 at 650K with that being worthy of lifting nearly 63 kg of Earthly weight), thereby keeping those insulated structural walls, windows and especially those insulation H2 spheres from simply floating off like supersonic soaring balloons might impose the greatest engineering challenge of sorts, or if you're a really smart ass lizard engineer, all this is just another fantastic structural and technological opportunistic advantage, for that of constructing really large and well insulated facilities (exactly like the ones I've been pointing out for the past 20 months onto all those Sgt. Schultz’ and Col. Wilhelm Klink's trained as pro-NASA "I see nothing" image interpreting types, which still proliferate by stipulating nothing can possibly exist because such objects are either too big or too small), as otherwise you certainly can do just that, build yourself a whole lot bigger stuff and, why the hell not?. How the hell size (as in the Venus suspension or whatever bridge) is having anything whatsoever to apply against things being artificial, seems only to be pointing out how desperate and pathetic my opponents have become.
Ponder upon what comparable Earthly structures could be created by such advantages; What if all the sudden our gravity were to become 81% and, a nifty and totally safe insulation substance like "dark matter" somehow allotted a whopping 66 kg/m3 worth of buoyancy plus offered an ultra thermal conduction resistance to boot. I'm not sure but, I'll just bet we would have for ourselves somewhat huge structures all over the place and fleets of small to massive airships for nearly all of our transport needs (including mining of H2SO4 acidic cloud water and subsequent vacuum distillation for acquiring pure H2O). Then of all things, what if our soon to become CO2 atmosphere could be directly processed into CO/O2 as fuel elements, thus no more petrol needed (at least not so much onboard, perhaps only a little of C12H26 and H2O2 [both of those being stable fluids, even on Venus]) for powering those airships and even for rocket like aircraft if you like. Gee whiz folks, looks pretty much like what's already been existing on Venus (that's sort of Duh, Duh and Duh!). In fact, a little further conjuring about our Earthly energy consumptions; looks like their likely cold blooded lizard per capita of Venus might not require but 10% of what you or I would utilize in order to exist and function, thereby calculated energy output per residence could be off by a factor of having to provide 90%, as too damn much energy.
@77 MW: the one in the middle; this fat dude is simply your standard community utility power generator. It's housing a 50 meter rotor/turbine having a 12.5 meter hub which affords 1840 m2 of turbine/rotor area and, it utilizes a 100 meter tower venturi differential for that of developing it's exit velocity of 3 m/s that's backed by a fairly respectable 0.4+ bar, by which this unit delivers it's nifty 77 MW (more so in their season of day), with the base entry velocity being 1 m/s. Obviously this stoutly utility resource is capable of sustaining 1000 residential loads and/or a mixed community of light industrial.
So, even if to be considering their insulation R-Factors as being somewhat in the toilet (like our R-21), so what. With each residence obtaining 100+ kw worth for each and every toasty hour and, along with the side byproduct of producing CO/O2 as also being a function of refrigeration and air conditioning, exactly who the hell's counting those BTU's or VTU's (especially if their interiors need only be maintained at 350 to 400K). If you can't do a little fundamental math, that's a rather nifty power source capable of a continuous 833 amps worth of 120 volt AC or, 416 amps worth of 240 volts AC, in either case that's at least 10 fold more energy then a well insulated Earth home, fully electric and a fairly large home at that. On Venus I'd expect there'd be R-256 insulation standards because, R-256 is certainly doable.
@21.8 GW: That's the really tall sucker on the left; I've recalculated this as based upon passing 6 m/s worth of CO2/N2 that = 6.73^6 kg/s, which represents the motherload of Vertical CO2 wind-power utility, as well as a few other worthwhile (forthcoming) features worth considering. This 150 meter rotor (- hub) accommodates 17,000 m2 worth of turbine area. The 1000 meter vertical offset makes full use of that 4+Bar/km of extremely worthwhile static atmospheric pressure and subsequent kinetic wind energy as offered by the mostly CO2 atmospheric density of Venus of 66 kg/m3 is applied through a rotor/turbine offering a 35% efficiency.
Again, I'm doing all this as sort of a reverse engineering method, obviously not all that accurate for certain pro-NASA wizards, applied from a steam formula/calculator that indicates upon the total of wet steam delivery in terms of an equal amount of kg/s and the same differential as well as temperature offset, as per GW or of whatever else you elect to compare such things to.
From a mere 1.5 m/s base entry, this impressive "tower of power" is I believe seriously capable of delivering an exit velocity of 12 m/s. Now folks, that's offering 75 GW and, please do try to remember, that's per hour, as in 2900 hours per night, likely somewhat closer to 100+ GW for each of those 2900 daytime hours.
Other worthwhile structural features or attributes; Besides providing a fairly massive structural wind tower accommodating a rim observatory community and/or community destination resort/club/shopping mall plus dozens of ethnic restaurants, being of at least 8 spacious surround levels or enclosed business and observation deck levels, each offering 6+ meters of interior height and each level accommodating up to 100,000 m2 apiece plus offering 8 sky domes or observatory like structures, each of potentially 50 meter diameter).
As for a real tension breaker, for this you'll need to try out a little interior CO2 wind surfing or sustainable sky diving. Simply by taking a lift on those central elevators accessing the center hub, then presumably packing along a small O2 respirator and relatively small parachute or whatever flying cape and your off, hopefully downward, as for remaining within this quite huge and relatively spacious vertical wind tunnel. Starting this jump of faith from just below those 8 fixed turbine stators (each stator being so large that their interiors provide passage ways [I'm thinking lizard movers, like a belt powered walkway] to/from the enormous rim surround structure), you've got yourself a good vertical kilometer to sore through, with that vertical CO2 wind being initially at nearly 12 m/s, so I'll just bet a little free-fall (sky-diving) may be in order, so as to keep yourself from being blown out the top, presumably passing nearby or through those turbine blades. Trust me, the out-takes and flying lizard parts make for really great "REAL-TV" on Venus.
Otherwise, think about your exterior sky diving opportunities or just super compact ultralights that could launch themselves from the upper exterior of this 1+km wind tower, soaring nearly indefinitely over their countryside (the one thing Venus has are those nifty convection thermals, as long as your O2 holds out, but then evolved lizard folk may require a mere 0.1% per mass of what you and I need, so accommodating such little O2 should not impose any significant problem) riding upon those surrounding CO2 thermals, as airfoil requirements for doing such would be at worst 1/10th that of any such Earthly aerodynamics and more likely 1/25th to as little as 1/50th, as the Venus atmosphere is seriously dense, so besides a mylar covered ultralight or parasail, including a mylar like thermal layered jump suit might be something appropriate, insulated or inflated with N2 or H2, which could impose another slight problem, such as becoming a little too buoyant. Remember that you're at 91% gravity to start off with, even at 75 bar H2 is worth at least 62 kg/m3 (more likely 66 kg/m3 at 625K). Even N2 is worth roughly 40% of those amounts.
Just re-thinking about our Earthly future(s); At the present rate of energy consumption and subsequent pollution of just about everything you and I hold dear, where it's already taking daily kilowatts of energy per person just in order to purify upon and deliver a few gallons of drinking water and, the subsequent combined global (mostly as from American interest) generation of artificial CO2, that combined with the resulting mass extinction of ocean plankton is just about forcing mother nature to throw in her towel (mother nature is fairly old, so throwing in her towel is simply not going to be pretty). In the likely event that nothing seriously causes mankind to alter it's course, Venus might soon get to looking pretty darn good, hot or not, as long as one can depend upon such an available natural resource of energy, such as vertical CO2 wind power, as then nearly any harsh environment can be managed (remember that; for humans being under water is harsh, but with technology we do manage that one quite well), at least for those of us of mostly non-Islamic origin (I'm just kidding folks, as Islamic's go, they're certainly representing a fine and morally upstanding bunch [besides all that, they have proven capable of surviving on less then 1/10 of what it takes keeping you or I alive] and, at least they're not the ones perpetrating any fictitious cold-wars, nor have they been busy arming and cloaking against the arch enemy of someone other's civil war, just so that it indirectly benefits in their favor, even if that so happens at the expense and demise of massive exterminations of other competitive sectors of humanity).
Damn, I do seem to keep forgetting, pro-NASA types (least of all NSA/DoD types), not only do they have *NO* sense of humor whatsoever, they also insure that others surrounding them retain only the skewed history which their Borg leaders want them to have, as that way there's no wasted consideration or need for guilt nor that subsequent pesky remorse thing. Total productivity, good, bad or indifferent, in spite of all the carnage, such as losing JFK and now 9/11 has proven that we must be willing to include a great number of our own, as those becoming acceptable cold-war and of other consequential elements that we must bear, so of as our "cost of doing business"...
Utilizing such vertical CO2 wind-power essentially eliminates any need or dependency for long range transmission lines, for that of going after let alone hauling about petrol chemicals, as well as for energy storage issues such as batteries (except for initially gathering then producing/extracting upon and storing of H2O in the format H2O2). Utilizing CO2 wind power is even more so efficient, as for applying direct turbine energy utilization as for further compression/conversion of CO2-->CO/O2, as this certainly has it's side benefits, such as pulling compressed CO2 bleed-off and then, along with a little efficient geothermal heat-pump like exchanging, you've got yourself tonnes of those btu's worth of refrigeration and/or air conditioning, as well as, of all things other, you've got yourself O2 to breath and burn along with all that CO element. I've stated this before, that a closed cycle of H2O or of various H2O2 concentrations would ultimately become the most exact alternative for freon, except obviously environmentally friendly as all get out. I'm not sure but, I do believe life doesn't get much better.
Now folks, I guess I'm not all that certain exactly, as to how dense you are, but you can't seriously be considering NASA's "status quo" as pertaining to Venus (of that planet being so thoroughly too damn hot and so absolutely dead and all that other nasty stuff). Granted, for Earth humans, that toasty hot atmosphere of mostly CO2 is not exactly inviting nor all that biologically usable, at least not in it's primal state, however, there are amounts of other atmospheric elements (including a fairly small amount of O2) and, with a little evolution and perhaps a little further technology assist, anything is possible, especially if your surviving means learning how to make do with the situation at hand or die (that situation at hand may have taken thousands of years to mature, somewhat like we're doing to Earth). Even a mere 0.1% O2, if that being at 75 bar, as for those living at roughly 5 km, is 75 times that much or equal to 7.5% at one bar, then applying the temperature factor (5 km elevated nighttime at 500K) as opposed to Earth's 300K and we're still at roughly 4.5% O2 as equal to Earthly 1-G and, lo and behold, evolution might just permit this sort of efficiency. This is one of those "don't look", but you and I could survive on that 4.5% and, obviously further insulating from all that environmental heat (especially as for their cooler nighttime) is something well within even our primitive technology. Utilizing that CO2 and/or other available elements as for habitat cooling/heat-exchanging is also within reach, especially once a little of that vertical wind power is mastered, not to mention other active geothermal attributes which Venus has loads of, more then it's fair share and, certainly it has everything that's entirely lacking on frozen Mars.
For another thing, we can get ourselves to/from Venus in 1/10 the time of anything Mars related, even lessor time yet upon every 18 month cycle, like this October 2002 and, achieve all of that at 1% the investment of anything Mars related. A Venus L2 relay platform and yet another Magellan-II would not cost but 1% of what that Mars microbe gathering and Earth based "microbe safe house" are going to take, and remember folks, anything Venus is more likely a already whole lot more sanitary then of anything from Mars. Besides, if we establish binary packet communications, then we obviously don't even have to bother bringing back any potentially lethal microbes and, talk is certainly dirt cheap as well as a whole lot safer compared to anything space travel or even robotic satellite mission involved would represent, certainly safer then bringing potentially lethal microbes back to Earth (Christ!, we can't hardly deal with the microbes we've got, so who's idea was it to add a whole lot of something other unknown into the pot?).
Consider if you might (as I'm certain most others have already), if I had actually bothered to make any of this up, that would certainly be quite another issue altogether and, supposedly simple as pie as for putting me down for good, however, as it stands, my research is having to work for the most part directly from NASA's very own moderated and thereby recorded "truths" about Venus, of which I accept for the most part as being a whole lot more revealing, truthful and subsequently productive then can be said about those Apollo issues. Try doing yourself a small favor, by not being so defencively pro-NASA, as best I can figure, that'll only come back to bite you.
If you choose to oppose my results, obviously being the genius you think and claim you are; then perhaps you tell me and others what's been going on and, what has not been going on, as in the world of astronomy and of our quest for ET. Are we truly looking for ET or aren't we and, if so, then with respect to Venus; what exactly have we been waiting for?
Please do keep checking back, for further updates as to my calculations and ideas or possibly even NASA approved conjectures regarding "vertical CO2 wind-power". As unlike my competitive pro-NASA grade G-69 Saints, those preferring to bash away at anything that's not their idea, I make mistakes all the freaking time (syntax, grammar and lots other) and, even some of my corrections can still be considered mistakes or simply not all that "accurate" but, at least I'm trying to make a positive difference and, I'm doing so at essentially no cost to the taxpayers, which seems a whole lot more then the rest of my opposition have been accomplishing. So, anytime you wish to jump in and save the day (by the way; you'll be receiving the credits for doing just that) or, in the case of saving your beloved NASA several hundred billions and a whole lot of face while you're at it, be my guest. You can trust that a whole lot of taxpayers as well as myself will become extremely appreciative.
Actually folks, I've been thinking again (I realize, that's nearly always a bad omen); Perhaps I have! been costing the taxpayers a tonne of bucks, by not pushing myself into this discovery earlier and subsequently getting this discovery out much sooner, thereby I have been allowing our cult NASA/NSA/DoD clubs to continue over-spending and doing so upon hidden agendas and otherwise wasting perfectly good talents, resources and of course nearly all of your tax money and, lets see now, that's been going on for at least 13 years and counting (35+ years if you wanted to include those cold-war Apollo ruse missions), as far as this opportunity that's been openly existing on Venus is concerned. Need I point out, that even if my math skills are limited, I would have to believe we're talking trillions or so bucks down that proverbial toilet and better yet, obtaining nearly nothing whatsoever for all that except, a whole lot of seriously pissed off Islamic Muslim's, perhaps soon with even more on their way.
NOTE: H2 instead of a vacuum or even in addition to whatever vacuum
Initially N2 airships would have proficiently accessed and gathered upon large qualities of moist H2SO4 (as I found recorded in several official references as typically 25% H2O) from those dense nighttime clouds, then simply vacuum distill/extract upon each gathering excursions as on their way back home. Once amounts of pure H2O are at hand and obviously stored (a few thousands tonnes worth, such as would need to be held within sufficiently pressurized globes or sphere like tanks, much like those I've identified), then with a little further processing as to creating several thousand tonnes of openly safe H2O2, then also onto creating those enormous volumes of just H2 is certainly not any technical problem, at least not for any smart ass lizard folk (I'll bet Darwin would be proud).
About structured and/or modular wall panel insulation; Relatively thin basalt/glass or ceramic spheres as containing H2 at 1 bar atmosphere and having those packed into whatever wall cavities with the remainder of surround space filled with N2 at the ambient pressure of 75 Bar. Now we have easily exceeded R-256/m (technically we could even exceed R-1024, though on Venus with N2 surrounding such H2 microspheres, as well as for everything being so bone dry makes for a structural R-256/m composite into a bloody snap) and doing such with H2 as securely glassified under a vacuum and of those spheres surrounded by such readily available N2 is absolutely safe. Such insulation panels could be as little as that of a mere 100 mm, or if need be several meters thick makes little difference when an airship is so large, whereas those spheres containing a vacuum and/or H2 being of 1 mm or less and the panel surface of whatever composite or even of an alloy steel is doable. On Venus there's very little free surface O2, absolutely no H2SO4 anywhere near the surface, so there's absolutely no oxidisation issues, certainly no rust, thereby no stinking coatings required except for whatever personal taste and decor.
I have a few other pages hopefully worth going after, many of these elaborating upon various airship potentials and, of the positive aspects of Venus, including many energy alternatives, not to forget nor leave out the October 2002 xenon/laser opportunity, a local area code as for calling Venus.