Space-based solar power becoming a reality?

[jimbogumbo]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-space-based-solar-power-ready-for-its-moment-in-the-sun/

[marshwiggle]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-space-based-solar-power-ready-for-its-moment-in-the-sun/

The article doesn't seem to mention a basic physics problem/tradeoff. For solar cells to be able to beam power to a specific point on Earth, they need to be in geosynchronous orbit, which is far out. If they're orbiting near the earth, then they will be beaming a swath of power (think a garotte) around the earth.

In either case, beaming huge amounts of power (so it's worthwhile) poses a grave risk as any variation in targeting could basically fry all kinds of stuff on the ground.


If military space-based lasers sound scary, why don't civilian *lasers that are much more powerful and always on?

(*Masers, if they're using microwave frequencies)

[dismalist]

"The historical objection to SBSP has been economics, principally the matter of launch cost," Jaffe says. "I think the verdict is still out on whether or not it's going to make economic sense. There is still plenty of grid technology development that needs to happen to get to the level of resilience and supply that we want to enjoy."

No shit, Jack.

Backstopping technology is nuclear. Get used to it.

[jimbogumbo]

I think the point of the article is that it's getting close to becoming economically feasible.

As to marshwiggle's concern, isn't geosynchronous doable?

[marshwiggle]

I think the point of the article is that it's getting close to becoming economically feasible.

As to marshwiggle's concern, isn't geosynchronous doable?

Think William Tell. I'll put a guy on a mountaintop with a rifle. You stand there with an apple on your head. If he shoots the aple, you get $100. Good deal?

(Geosynchronous orbit is a mountaintop VERY far away.)

[jimbogumbo]

I think the point of the article is that it's getting close to becoming economically feasible.

As to marshwiggle's concern, isn't geosynchronous doable?

Think William Tell. I'll put a guy on a mountaintop with a rifle. You stand there with an apple on your head. If he shoots the aple, you get $100. Good deal?

(Geosynchronous orbit is a mountaintop VERY far away.)

Depends on the guy:)

Yes it is far away. But, we're getting closer to capability with Artemis and all the private efforts to create affordability, yes?

[nebo113]

"The historical objection to SBSP has been economics, principally the matter of launch cost," Jaffe says. "I think the verdict is still out on whether or not it's going to make economic sense. There is still plenty of grid technology development that needs to happen to get to the level of resilience and supply that we want to enjoy."

No shit, Jack.

Backstopping technology is nuclear. Get used to it.

Are you saying that more focus needs to be on nuclear development to supply energy?  Just want to make sure I understand your point.

[marshwiggle]

I think the point of the article is that it's getting close to becoming economically feasible.

As to marshwiggle's concern, isn't geosynchronous doable?

Think William Tell. I'll put a guy on a mountaintop with a rifle. You stand there with an apple on your head. If he shoots the aple, you get $100. Good deal?

(Geosynchronous orbit is a mountaintop VERY far away.)

Depends on the guy:)

Yes it is far away. But, we're getting closer to capability with Artemis and all the private efforts to create affordability, yes?

Ah, because as long as it's "affordable" we don't have to worry about technical glitches resulting in hot-knife-through-butter across swaths of the planet. Or of any *hacker figuring out how to do that on purpose.


*including those funded by other nations.

[dismalist]

"The historical objection to SBSP has been economics, principally the matter of launch cost," Jaffe says. "I think the verdict is still out on whether or not it's going to make economic sense. There is still plenty of grid technology development that needs to happen to get to the level of resilience and supply that we want to enjoy."

No shit, Jack.

Backstopping technology is nuclear. Get used to it.

Are you saying that more focus needs to be on nuclear development to supply energy?  Just want to make sure I understand your point.

There's no development needed, though it is welcome. A backstopping technology, if it exists, means there is no point developing an energy source more expensive than it.

Go nuclear, young [wo]man, go nuclear! :-)

[jimbogumbo]

I think the point of the article is that it's getting close to becoming economically feasible.

As to marshwiggle's concern, isn't geosynchronous doable?

Think William Tell. I'll put a guy on a mountaintop with a rifle. You stand there with an apple on your head. If he shoots the aple, you get $100. Good deal?

(Geosynchronous orbit is a mountaintop VERY far away.)

Depends on the guy:)

Yes it is far away. But, we're getting closer to capability with Artemis and all the private efforts to create affordability, yes?

Ah, because as long as it's "affordable" we don't have to worry about technical glitches resulting in hot-knife-through-butter across swaths of the planet. Or of any *hacker figuring out how to do that on purpose.


*including those funded by other nations.

I would be worried, yes. If geosynchronous is possible in the near future, what uses would you like to see for it?

dismalist: I'm still holding out hope for innovations in fusion and hydrogen-electric. I see nuclear as an until something better (and to echo marsh, safer) is widely available.

[Hibush]

Moving the electicity to earth is the hard part of course. If only there were a technology that would allow us to move the energy in the form of photons, and then capture them from the earth's surface. Have nature do all the hard work for you.

[marshwiggle]

I think the point of the article is that it's getting close to becoming economically feasible.

As to marshwiggle's concern, isn't geosynchronous doable?

Think William Tell. I'll put a guy on a mountaintop with a rifle. You stand there with an apple on your head. If he shoots the aple, you get $100. Good deal?

(Geosynchronous orbit is a mountaintop VERY far away.)

Depends on the guy:)

Yes it is far away. But, we're getting closer to capability with Artemis and all the private efforts to create affordability, yes?

Ah, because as long as it's "affordable" we don't have to worry about technical glitches resulting in hot-knife-through-butter across swaths of the planet. Or of any *hacker figuring out how to do that on purpose.


*including those funded by other nations.

I would be worried, yes. If geosynchronous is possible in the near future, what uses would you like to see for it?

Geosynchronous orbit gets used for all kinds of stuff now. But communication power-level radio signals are literally orders-of-magnitude different from gigawatt (or more!) grid-scale power being beamed to theoretically hit a microscopic (relatively) target with no variation due to any technical glitches, asteroid strikes, etc. (At that power, a fraction of a second wiggle could incinerate a neighbourhood.)

[apl68]

I would assume that the ground receiver point would be located in an area with a buffer zone separating it from anything it might damage.

It's an interesting idea that could potentially help out a lot.  Given how many years they've been talking about it--I recall seeing articles like this when I was a kid over 40 years ago--I'm inclined to believe it when I see it.

[dismalist]

I think the point of the article is that it's getting close to becoming economically feasible.

As to marshwiggle's concern, isn't geosynchronous doable?

Think William Tell. I'll put a guy on a mountaintop with a rifle. You stand there with an apple on your head. If he shoots the aple, you get $100. Good deal?

(Geosynchronous orbit is a mountaintop VERY far away.)

Depends on the guy:)

Yes it is far away. But, we're getting closer to capability with Artemis and all the private efforts to create affordability, yes?

Ah, because as long as it's "affordable" we don't have to worry about technical glitches resulting in hot-knife-through-butter across swaths of the planet. Or of any *hacker figuring out how to do that on purpose.


*including those funded by other nations.

I would be worried, yes. If geosynchronous is possible in the near future, what uses would you like to see for it?

Geosynchronous orbit gets used for all kinds of stuff now. But communication power-level radio signals are literally orders-of-magnitude different from gigawatt (or more!) grid-scale power being beamed to theoretically hit a microscopic (relatively) target with no variation due to any technical glitches, asteroid strikes, etc. (At that power, a fraction of a second wiggle could incinerate a neighbourhood.)

I'm sure a fire insurance policy can be written to cover mishaps like that. I wonder what the price would be. :-)

[marshwiggle]

I think the point of the article is that it's getting close to becoming economically feasible.

As to marshwiggle's concern, isn't geosynchronous doable?

Think William Tell. I'll put a guy on a mountaintop with a rifle. You stand there with an apple on your head. If he shoots the aple, you get $100. Good deal?

(Geosynchronous orbit is a mountaintop VERY far away.)

Depends on the guy:)

Yes it is far away. But, we're getting closer to capability with Artemis and all the private efforts to create affordability, yes?

Ah, because as long as it's "affordable" we don't have to worry about technical glitches resulting in hot-knife-through-butter across swaths of the planet. Or of any *hacker figuring out how to do that on purpose.


*including those funded by other nations.

I would be worried, yes. If geosynchronous is possible in the near future, what uses would you like to see for it?

Geosynchronous orbit gets used for all kinds of stuff now. But communication power-level radio signals are literally orders-of-magnitude different from gigawatt (or more!) grid-scale power being beamed to theoretically hit a microscopic (relatively) target with no variation due to any technical glitches, asteroid strikes, etc. (At that power, a fraction of a second wiggle could incinerate a neighbourhood.)

I'm sure a fire insurance policy can be written to cover mishaps like that. I wonder what the price would be. :-)

Tinfoil hats will be not only fashionable, but functional!