Space-Based Solar Cells is the Answer!!

“http://inventorspot.com/articles/spacebased_solar_cells_could_bea_7507

Gigantic satellites orbiting the Earth, equipped with solar cells, could collect enough energy from the sun every year to power the world seven times over. Beaming the energy down to Earth in the form of microwaves or a laser, the satellites would provide energy which would be gathered in antennas on the ground and then converted to electricity.



It may sound like a far-fetched idea, but researchers from the National Security Space Office (NSSO) say that the plan is technologically feasible, and could provide more energy than could fossil fuels, wind and nuclear power combined. They have recently presented their findings to the US government, recommending that the government spend $10 billion over the next 10 years to build a test satellite capable of electromagnetically beaming 10 megawatts of electric energy down to Earth.

"A single kilometer-wide band of geosynchronous earth orbit experiences enough solar flux in one year (approximately 212 terawatt-years) to nearly equal the amount of energy contained within all known recoverable conventional oil reserves on Earth today (approximately 250 TW-yrs)," according the report. "This far exceeds the projected 30TW of annual demand in mid-century." ... (continued)”

“Imagine how many fried birds would be on the ground underneath the satellites.”

“This is a really old idea. Is the "new" thing about it that's it's now supposedly technologically feasible? What about economically?”

“I thought you left TT, sarge?”

“I read the title of this and my first thought was "Wow, that's some extension cord!"”

“The Earth IS a "Space Based Solar Cell....."”

“Concerning the burning birds or it being a danger if it missed the receptor.

wrong. The power density of the beam is very low. If it missed, it wouldn't be a major danger to anyone. If it were dangerous, it would never get past environmental impact statements, since you can't keep birds from flying into the beam. This is not some Michael Crichton novel where the birds might burst into flame.

advances in photovoltaics, electronics and robotics, which would reduce the cost and eliminate the need for humans to assemble the equipment in space, the idea emerged again about a decade ago.

In 1995, NASA researchers found that, though feasible, SBSP was still not competitive when measured against the $0.05/kWh price of electricity and $15/barrel price of oil prevalent at that time.

I think $80-$100 a barrel makes it more feasable now. Not to mention all teh rhetoric about global warming and raping our planet of its non-renewable resources.

The 100's of space launches a year to build this system will also be the springboard needed to advance near space exploration/exploitation.”

“How much greater would the pollution of the planet be if they had to up the launches of space vehicles?”

“Mutt, you're right. It's an old idea. If you thought that I left you didn't read thoroughly what I said about that.”

“It is an old idea that wasn't pursued because oil was cheap, no one cared about strip mining mountain tops or carbon emissions. Times have changed. We need space technology. We need better launch engines. We need clean, plentiful power. We need a high profile space project that real people can see, respect and understand. No one gives a damn if we find water on one of Saturn's moons, or some microscopic form of life on mars. But men and women working on something that has a real purpose is something we can get behind. The ISS has no real purpose other than to build it.

This is what we need for many reasons ...

here is one from the article. If this is even remotely possible, its worth pursuing.

SBSP could be utilized to split hydrogen from water and the carbon monoxide (syngas) from carbon dioxide which can then be combined to manufacture any desired hydrocarbon fuel, including gasoline, diesel, kerosene and jet fuel," the report said. -”