Comments on: Land of the Rising Sun Power! Japan May Build a Solar Station in Space by 2030

By: John

John — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 03:17:38 +0000

This is a space weapons program in civilian clothing.

If launch costs reduce by 10x, then space-based solar only will cost about 10x as much as land-based solar energy.

This is not about economics. But a huge microwave beam in space could disable any satellite, quite a cannon.

By: John

John — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 03:17:00 +0000

This is a space weapons program in civilian clothing.

If launch costs reduce by 10x, then space-based solar only will cost about 10x as much as land-based solar energy.

This is not about economics. But a huge microwave beam in space could disable any satellite, quite a cannon.

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:33:18 +0000

These schemes have been searching for funding since the 1970s. The reason they continuously fail is the technology simply does not exist.

http://electric-vehicles-cars-bikes.blogspot.com/2009/11/japanese-space-agency-aims-for-space.html

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:33:00 +0000

These schemes have been searching for funding since the 1970s. The reason they continuously fail is the technology simply does not exist.

http://electric-vehicles-cars-bikes.blogspot.com/2009/11/japanese-space-agency-aims-for-space.html

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:33:00 +0000

These schemes have been searching for funding since the 1970s. The reason they continuously fail is the technology simply does not exist.

http://electric-vehicles-cars-bikes.blogspot.com/2009/11/japanese-space-agency-aims-for-space.html

By: Bud Bundy

Bud Bundy — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:50:36 +0000

I don’t think it is accurate to say solar energy is “at least five times stronger in space than on Earth”. As far as I know, the amount of direct solar insolation is only about 35% greater in space than at the surface (1300 W/sq m vs. 960 W/sq m).

Perhaps what is meant is that 5 times more energy can be collected, due to not having a day/night cycle in high orbit.

By: Bud Bundy

Bud Bundy — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:50:00 +0000

Perhaps what is meant is that 5 times more energy can be collected, due to not having a day/night cycle in high orbit.

By: sidewinder

sidewinder — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:57:32 +0000

I assume that there are transmission losses in beaming power from the collection point in space to the ground, just as there are transmission losses thru wire.

Those losses would be in the form of heat exchange between the transmission beam & the atmosphere.

It seems to me that the last thing we want would be yet another form of heat pollution.

This on top of the immense expense of launching & constructing these space-borne arrays.

By: sidewinder

sidewinder — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:57:00 +0000

I assume that there are transmission losses in beaming power from the collection point in space to the ground, just as there are transmission losses thru wire.

Those losses would be in the form of heat exchange between the transmission beam & the atmosphere.

It seems to me that the last thing we want would be yet another form of heat pollution.

This on top of the immense expense of launching & constructing these space-borne arrays.