Space Solar Power System | Hacker News Reader

Space Solar Power System

usef.or.jp

31 pointsmotters11 comments

This is a good example of why technical people need to learn how to write.

I made it through that entire paper, looking at all the diagrams, and nowhere could I find an answer to whether the system they're proposing is supposed to beam power from space to the ground, or from the ground up into space.

That's something they need to put in the first paragraph.

"The Big Confusing Acronym (BCM) project is a proposal to do [seven word description of what your thing does]." Make sure your reader is on the same page, Then tell him about your progress in putting together a working committee and how many MW you'll generate in phase 2.

This seems like a pretty huge installation to put into GEO (geosynchronous orbit). Seems like space junk could be a big problem.

That can be used to justify funding for the Laser Broom.

For large solar factories micrometeorites would become an issue.

For an overdose of information on this topic, see:

http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/

It's odd to use the word "baseline" when the power output hits zero two times a day.

That's what (very big) capacitors are for. :-)

Or water reservoirs: pump water into uphill into the reservoir when solar/wind power is available; run it downhill through generators to generate electricity when power from other sources doesn't meet demand. (Which is one of the more common ways of dealing with the problem right now: Google for "pumped storage".)

Field 3 of them in opposite orbital positions: problem mitigated. But cost per GWHr goes up some.

Article doesn't address the receiver. What's the efficiency?

The platforms are oriented toward Earth so they present edgewise to the sun twice a day and have a rectified sin wave power output as a result. The solution to that is to have three platforms, offset by about 60 degrees each. Then the sum of your power outputs is mostly flat. (Or to use mirrors like the article mentions, but I have to wonder if the cost of a mirror in geostationary orbit is any different than the cost of a solar cell.)

Another problem is that for several months of the year, around the equinoxes, the satellites will be eclipsed by the earth for up to an hour or so each day. The mighty Goog presents this article that will tell you all about it: http://celestrak.com/columns/v04n09/

I think as long as you have multiple satellites spread over more than one timezone and an electric grid this problem can be mitigated.

-EOM-

I must append with my obligatory warning: Any nation which can put such a huge power delivery system in orbit would have to ask itself "Given the relatively minor changes to transmitters to make this thing into a giant aimable phased array at frequencies dangerous to humans, and the vast sum of money we are spending anyway: Surely it would be a negligent use of resources not to build in the secret death-ray capability."

Where I live we have developed a marvelous capacity for thinking the unthinkable. You don't want us to hasve space based solar power.

If any country did install a dual purpose solar-power-station /death-beam-installation I would imagine most other countries would simply make sure they have the ability to shoot these things down. It's not like they would be particularly easy to defend.

So can we not start silly arms races by not creating new classes of unnecessary strategic weapons - we are still trying to get rid of the last lot.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com