...100 MW of Space Solar Power ...per single launch!
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Does inductive reasoning lead to knowledge?
Next: What is the correct term for this type of chart?
From: Jonathan on 13 Dec 2009 04:41 Controversy Flares Over Space-Based Solar Power Plans Jeremy Hsu space.com - Wed Dec 2, 10:15 am ET "Solaren would then need to launch a solar panel array capable of generating 400 megawatts. The total launch weight of all the equipment would be the equivalent of about 400 metric tons, or 20 shuttle-sized launches, according to Hoffert. But Solaren says that it would just require four or five heavy-lift rocket launches capable of carrying 25 metric tons, or about one fourth of Hoffert's weight estimate. The company is relying on developing more efficient photovoltaic technology for the solar panels, as well as mirrors that help focus sunlight. Solaren has not provided details on just how its technology works, citing intellectual property concerns. But it expects that its space solar power can convert to RF energy with greater than 80 percent efficiency, and expects similar conversion efficiency for converting the RF energy back to DC electricity on the ground in California. The company also anticipates minimal transmission losses from the space to the ground." http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20091202/sc_space/controversyflaresoverspacebasedsolarpowerplans The 'inevitable' is steadily becoming possible...imho. Jonathan s
From: Sylvia Else on 13 Dec 2009 05:57 > Solaren has not provided details on just how its technology > works, citing intellectual property concerns. Meaning it wouldn't stand up to the inevitable expert scrutiny if they got a patent. And let's remember that it's perfectly possible to make money lawfully out of a technically flawed concept if you can get investors - you just pay yourself a good salary. Sylvia.
From: gaetanomarano on 13 Dec 2009 09:37 .. .. Space Solar Power hoax/illusion DEBUNKED article: http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts/038sspdebunked.html .. .. Why the Ares-1 is already DEAD article: http://www.ghostnasa.com/posts2/058ares1dead.html .. ..
From: tadchem on 13 Dec 2009 10:20 On Dec 13, 4:41 am, "Jonathan" <H...(a)Again.net> wrote: > Controversy Flares Over Space-Based Solar Power Plans > > Jeremy Hsu > space.com - Wed Dec 2, 10:15 am ET > > "Solaren would then need to launch a solar panel array capable > of generating 400 megawatts. The total launch weight of all the > equipment would be the equivalent of about 400 metric tons, > or 20 shuttle-sized launches, according to Hoffert. > > But Solaren says that it would just require four or five heavy-lift > rocket launches capable of carrying 25 metric tons, or about > one fourth of Hoffert's weight estimate. The company is relying > on developing more efficient photovoltaic technology for the > solar panels, as well as mirrors that help focus sunlight. > > Solaren has not provided details on just how its technology > works, citing intellectual property concerns. But it expects that > its space solar power can convert to RF energy with greater > than 80 percent efficiency, and expects similar conversion > efficiency for converting the RF energy back to DC > electricity on the ground in California. The company also > anticipates minimal transmission losses from the space > to the ground."http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20091202/sc_space/controversyflaresover... > > The 'inevitable' is steadily becoming possible...imho. > > Jonathan > > s Nice, if there's somebody in orbit who can use 400 MW. If you want to use it planet-side, you have to get it down here. THAT creates problems. A storage device has mass, which brings all the transport problems of a safe re-entry and recovery. A conduit would require materials with properties we have not developed yet. A beam would present an enormous safety and environmental hazard. You could cook an Airbus in milliseconds with a 400 megawatt microwave. That's about 200,000 heavy-duty microwave ovens - at once. Tom Davidson Richmond, VA
From: Jonathan on 13 Dec 2009 10:25
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia(a)not.at.this.address> wrote in message news:00a09904$0$23357$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... >> Solaren has not provided details on just how its technology >> works, citing intellectual property concerns. > > Meaning it wouldn't stand up to the inevitable expert scrutiny if they got a > patent. > Maybe, but keeping a secret could mean fraud or it could mean a breakthrough, we don't know for sure. But the electric company P G & E, one of the largest utilities in the nation, while considering the contract should be privy to the details of the technology. And from their application to the state utilities commission wrote.... Public Utilities Commission of the State of California Subject: PG&E's Power Purchase Agreement with Solaren Corporation "Solaren is using an innovative space-based solar technology, which, if successful, would represent a break-through in the renewable power industry. While emerging technologies like space solar face considerable hurdles under a traditional viability analysis, PG&E believes that potential, significant benefits to its customers from a successful space solar installation outweigh the challenges associated with a new and unproven technology." http://www.pge.com/nots/rates/tariffs/tm2/pdf/ELEC_3449-E.pdf The key wording is the statement that ...the potential outweigh the risk. That's called a tipping point, from pie-in-the-sky to nearly practical. > And let's remember that it's perfectly possible to make money lawfully out of > a technically flawed concept if you can get investors - you just pay yourself > a good salary. Right. But the point is that a 'Big Utility' has taken a good look at an early attempt at SSP and have ...signed upon the dotted line. The point is that both sides, buyer and seller, seem to think the idea is realistic enough to attempt a start up. That's a big deal imho....a breakthrough. I mean, did it really matter of the first airline made money, or the first nuclear power plant? It's the 'first' aspect that matters, not so much is it lives up to all the precise promises. Jonathan > > Sylvia. |